For Approval.
(Copies of Agendas and Minutes of the Community Council are held at Fife Council’s Local Office, St Mary’s Place and the Town Library, Church Square. Those from late 1997 on are on line at http://www.louisxiv.demon.co.uk/standrewscc/)
Chair: Donald Macgregor, Ian Goudie
Les Beech, Bette Christie, Ken Crichton, George Davidson, Ken Fraser, Ian Goudie, Pete Lindsay, Dennis Macdonald, Donald Macgregor, Elise Methven, Joe Peterson, Bruce Ryan, Carole Tricker.
Ewen Sparks (Merchants’ Association)
Sheila Black, Jane Ann Liston, Frances Melville, Bill Sangster.
Patrick Marks, Alex Yabrov, Stuart Holdsworth, Chris Lesurf, Penny Uprichard.
Approved
Dr Claire Cassidy spoke to describe the study that she and Joanne Persson are launching at the University’s School of Psychology, on age differences in memory. They are recruiting volunteers aged 60-70.
The study is examining age differences in cognitive performance. Taking part in the study involves performing tasks assessing processing speed and memory with subjects being given feedback on their performance. Finally, there will be a psychological questionnaire measuring things like self-esteem and mental health. The study will take approximately 35-40 minutes, carries a small payment for taking part and reimbursement of any travelling expenses incurred.
Anyone interested in taking part should contact Joanne Persson on 01334-462060 or jkp3@st-andrews.ac.uk.
Colin Fleming, Chair of Canongate School Board, outlined the options that had been discussed publicly so far, though said that these were not necessarily the only or final options. One was to close either Langlands or Lawhead School, distributing the pupils to the other and Canongate (the non-denominational primary schools) with Greyfriars RC Primary occupying the vacated building. The second option is for Greyfriars to site-share with Canongate. He said it was the opinion of all the school boards that the status quo was the preferable option in the interests of the children presently at the schools.
Giving some of the reasons for opposing change he cited a Scottish Executive policy paper which stated that the children’s needs should be at the centre of school estates policy and the school should be at the heart of the community. Another section of the paper says the right solution to school estates questions should meet the aspirations and needs of today’s pupils, staff and parents. He believed the present proposals did not meet these guidelines and accused Fife Council of not mentioning the pupils in discussions so far.
Looking at the shared campus option he admitted that it can work, but only where certain criteria are met: the buildings must be designed with a shared campus in mind and both school communities must want a shared campus. Where schools are forced together there are no examples of a successful outcome. Whether shared, or just absorbing part of one of the other non-faith schools, he feared that Canongate would go from undercrowding to overcrowding, at the expense of facilities currently in dedicated rooms being pushed back into classrooms, and class sizes rising to the maximum permitted.
Capacity: Canongate has a capacity of 347 at maximum class sizes. Fife Council give 414 in its reports and web-site, but now admit this isn’t correct. Canongate+Greyfriars would be 380 pupils. At Lawhead, an open plan school, again with a capacity of 347, for the Lawhead+Greyfriars scenario three classes would have to fit in each open plan area.
He asked community council:
He claimed that the driving factor must be budget, and asked what was wrong with Fife’s budget in 2005/6 that these proposals were being rushed through. It is the schools board’s belief that the policy is purely financially driven, and does not take account of the pupils.
Ian Goudie suggested the question as to whether discussions had been held over re-development of school sites was ideally suited to a Freedom of Information enquiry. Colin Fleming responded that such an enquiry had been made, but no response had been received. Further questioned he admitted that full statutory period for a response had not yet elapsed.
John McLaughlin (Education Service) responded unequivocally; he has written within the week to say that “there have been no discussions with any form of developer on any of the sites.”
Various members and Cllr Melville on behalf of her colleagues added to the “why now?” question, including a request for context: when was primary education provision last reviewed in St Andrews?
Education officer John McLaughlin gave an overview of the process underway at the moment.
A similar exercise with primary schools was undertaken in Dunfermline recently, with similar issues. At the time there was criticism of the Education Service for proceeding directly to the formal review which they have a duty to undertake. People in the affected area, Abbeyview, had suspicions that the move directly to formal review indicated a ‘done deal’. It was decided that future consultations would be preceded by an informal phase contacting the directly affected groups such as the school boards, head teachers and staff of the schools. Not all parents, but their representatives who could reasonably be contacted.
He acknowledged that the result was a degree of legitimate concern in St Andrews. He felt however that the informal process has been valuable as it had brought forward issues which the service might not otherwise have been aware of before the formal phase.
A paper is now being drawn up for presentation to the Children’s Services Committee (25 Aug), when the committee will decide whether to proceed to formal consultation. This takes an absolute minimum of 28 days, but usually 3 months or so. There will be more than the two options discussed so far in St Andrews in the paper, but with a recommendation for one. As a Fife Council officer he could not, of course, pre-empt that report to committee at this meeting.
He could however answer the questions raised. He had already answered the question about having contact with developers. They have not, nor would they in the circumstances. When a site was closed in Abbeyview it became part of Fife Council’s corporate assets, not Education Service’s.
There are two key questions in the St Andrews area:
One is the under-occupancy of schools. Education Services across Scotland have a duty to review schools which fall below 60% of their maximum occupancy. He admitted that he had made the mistake referred to over Canongate capacity – 414 rather than 347. The reason was that they had counted the nursery capacity in with the primary. It was simply a mistake; they occasionally make them. He did note that in the past Canongate had accommodated over 400 primary pupils.
Three of the four St Andrews primary schools are under 60% capacity even when Education Service has reduced those capacities in the past year. The population trend in St Andrews is noticeably downwards. In Canongate, with a capacity of nearly 350 pupils, fewer than 100 come from the catchment area. This number is projected to decline. Though there are many more pupils at the school the only guide to future numbers that is “robust” for planning purposes is based on the catchment numbers, not placing requests.
It is not a sudden thing; the need for review in St Andrews was first highlighted in 2003 in the core strategy and school estates papers (as was Abbeyview).
The second, separate, issue is the suitability of Greyfriars School for C21st education. This has been subject of much correspondence over the last few weeks which will inform the paper to committee on 24 August.
On the value of sites he could say that the entire Fife estate, including building, at present is valued in excess of £600M. The land values of sites across Fife vary in the range £180K-£500K per acre.
On the transport issues that had been raised (length and mode of journey to school, etc) he would only say that these issues would be addressed in the final paper to committee.
Why now? For the last two years Fife Council has been identifying the extent and condition of its school estate. This should have happened some time ago; there has been a generation of underinvestment in the national school estate. It is now necessary to undertake a major change in activity to correct this and investment in schools, though various forms of funding, is now at levels unprecedented in recent years. That’s the general Fife position.
Locally they have taken account of the draft local plan and the structure plan in the proposals, as they did in the consideration of the secondary school estate which was the subject of consultation across Fife in June. He emphasised that it was not possible to wait until the plans are finalised; they are under pressure to move ahead. Waiting would mean that a mid-Fife review would not start for at least two years, and west Fife for over three and a half years. It is quite correct that the children should be at the heart of the process and the schools at the centre of the community; that is the position this process is aiming to get to. Why was there not investment previously – 5 or 10 years ago? Because there was not the capacity to do so then; now the issues won’t wait any longer.
When were the schools last reviewed? There has been no major review within a generation, across Scotland. That is why the Scottish Executive have made it an obligation on local authorities to undertake reviews and report annually. Their target is 300 new-built or refurbished schools by 2007. To meet the Executive’s requirements Fife Council have undertaken the review process. He acknowledged that any review of education was a fraught process raising understandable anxieties in the community and individual parents, and that there were difficult decisions to be taken by the Children’s Services committee, starting with whether to undertake formal review of St Andrews Primary Schools.
Ewen Sparks suggested that despite the points made it would be more sensible to put off any decision on primary education for a few months to see the outcome of the local plan, etc, with its possibility for massive expansion for St Andrews. Despite the talk of massive investment his understanding is that everyone is happy with the status quo in St Andrews.
John McLaughlin responded that St Andrews’ primary school population has declined 25% since about 1990. Without development that decline is expected to continue by 15-20% of the current roll over the next 10 years. This would lead to occupancy rates under 50%. From new developments across Scotland 20 primary pupils could be expected per 100 houses – 200 from the often-mentioned 1,000 houses. It would require a much larger expansion to reverse the projected decline in school populations.
Henry Paul, Chair of Greyfriars School Board asked what the phrase “fit for the 21st century” meant; how many other schools in Fife meet that standard? Secondly he said that his school board could find no example of a shared campus working where it was not a new build. Where schools had been forced together in the west of Scotland this had led to sectarianism, he said. These proposals in St Andrews are likely to lead to sectarianism where there was none before.
Donald Macgregor summarised the message from St Andrews as not wanting a successful school to close whatever the justifications for review were. The case that the review would lead to improvement did not seem to be proved to the satisfaction of the interested parties in St Andrews.
Les Beech condemned the lack of consultation with the parents. John McLaughlin reiterated that the current consultation was an informal preliminary because of the criticisms over the direct formal approach previously; parents would be involved in the formal process yet to start. Every affected person would receive copies of the papers and would have the opportunity to make their comment in writing or at public meetings in St Andrews. Would they be listened to? was the response, which was further picked up by Cllr Frances Melville.
John McLaughlin emphasised that view would be listened to. But he said that no proposal to close a school ever, in his experience, had support from the parents. Closing a school is a very difficult decision to take as can be seen from press coverage across Scotland.
Cllr Sheila Black was concerned at the lack of accounting for placing requests; she felt these were particularly relevant to St Andrews as many parents working in the town could not afford to live here, but wanted their children at school close to hand. John McLaughlin replied that in fact the placing requests in St Andrews, though high, were from one school in St Andrews to another, not into St Andrews. Placing requests into Madras are particularly low, probably because of St Andrews’ location; there are very few requests from Mid or West Fife. Requests for moves between both levels of schools in an area were high elsewhere.
Bruce Ryan asked if the capacity of schools could be reduced to avoid the 60% rule by closing classrooms and using them for non-educational purposes? Yes. there were various such approaches across Scotland, indeed such as the nursery provision at Canongate.
Cllr Jane Ann Liston asked what happened to such as nursery provision or special needs if a school hosting them closed or received an influx from a closed school? On nursery education the reply was that there were three schools with nurseries (not Greyfriars) plus seven ‘partner nurseries’ in St Andrews; the details of any impact would be in the paper to Children’s Services committee. Similarly on special education (now ‘Additional Support Needs’), any effects will also be dealt with in the paper. In response to a query from Elise Methven he confirmed that after school care, such as at the Cosmos, would be covered there too.
Ian Goudie asked how far ahead the projections of school rolls were being taken? Five years for primaries, eleven for secondaries from their own data of children in or about to enter the system. Following on from that answer Ian Goudie added that Fife Council were proposing a 15% increase in the population of the town in the next 10 years. He thought that the figure of 20/100 referred to earlier must depend very much on the type of housing; if Fife Council managed to increase the proportion of affordable housing, suitable for young families, he would expect that ratio to change. In reply John McLaughlin agreed, but pointed out the current figure across Fife was 17.5/100. Their experience was that the ratio was less to do with affordable housing and more correlated with the age of the new built house; “there is a bulge when the house reaches the age of five” when the per-household rate nearly doubles. From very new or old houses there was effectively no input at all.
Karen Barnett, Chair of Lawhead School Board, asked how accurate had previous projections of school populations been? She then accused Fife Council of inflating the capacity figure for Lawhead (347) to give an occupancy below 60%. She asked if the figures would be readjusted back down in view of these concerns.
John McLaughlin replied that the figures had been reached after 18 months’ study; they would not be changed. There would be a reduction of capacity in future when the next round of class size cuts were introduced nationally. The recent 2004 class reductions to 30 in P1-3 had been taken into account, with 25 coming for P1 in 2007 which would then work its way through the system. On long term reliability of school roll projections that was really a question for professional statisticians, but he had found them reliable over the last 10 years, down to a margin of error of 5 children in a year's population of thousands. Donald Macgregor commented though that when he was a staff member at Madras there was persistent underestimation of take-up.
Colin Fleming welcomed the talk about extra funding for schools, but asked where was the extra investment for St Andrews primary schools. From his point of view there would be money from selling off one site but where was the extra money coming from and was it coming here?
John McLaughlin said that investment is prioritised on the condition of schools. In East Fife the condition (not suitability which is a different measure, fitness for purpose) of building is very good – the windows and roofs are intact, etc. That is not true across Fife; some schools are in a shameful condition and have priority. If there is a saving made it is not necessarily invested in that locality, it goes into the corporate funds for reinvestment according to the council’s priorities.
Turning briefly to secondary provision in response to a question, he said Fife Council was investing £250M in the secondary estate across Fife. This includes looking again at Madras and the possibility of a new school in the Tayport-St Andrews corridor. He would not comment on the possibilities for Madras at Station Park. Council has taken the decision that a single site campus for Madras is a preferred option, as is a school in the Tayport area, based on predicted development pressures in the local plan. There have been no talks about locations yet.
Nothing to report this month.
She was very pleased with the overall appearance of the town during the Open.
Noted that there were some problems over residents’ parking and parking for workers driving into town. Transportation have noted these for next time and will make a point of contacting the Merchants’ Association as there was a communication gap this year; not everybody reads newspapers it seems.
Les Beech said the Taxi Association were very upset by the way their members were treated during the Open. In particular the initial arrangements at Leuchars, which worked well, were changed ‘for safety reasons’ to require passengers be dropped on the main road rather than at the station itself. There was even an incident where elderly travellers had to be dropped in Leuchars village to walk back to the station. People alighting at Leuchars Station were being told they were not allowed to use taxis even though they had cars booked and were not golf spectators. In St Andrews, taxi drop-off points were occupied by delivery vans all the time; there were incidents of taxis being harassed by police for dropping off less able-bodied passengers close to their destinations in ‘restricted’ zones.
He criticised the self-congratulatory press releases from Fife Council over the Open policing arrangements; they did not reflect the experience of the taxis.
Bill Sangster said he would note that and other reports of problems he’d seen and bring them to the next Community Safety Panel meeting.
Pete Lindsay had seen a taxi forced to make an emergency stop by a van full of police driving the wrong way through the West Port. Unfortunately he was so surprised he failed to take the offender’s number.
Bette Christie reported that there seemed to be no disabled parking provision in town during the Open.
He has received complaints about this proposal but it is work being carried out under a traffic order and does not come before councillors.
Les Beech felt this was another step in the stealth-pedestrianisation of St Andrews by the Transportation Service. He felt the location near the brow of the hill was dangerous. He expected it to cause many accidents.
Ian Goudie drew attention to agenda item Appendix B.2 item 2 on new crossings. This mentions some of the disadvantages with the Lade Braes crossing. On the other hand the crossing does potentially provide a safe route to Madras College. For cyclists coming up the hill it is in a particularly awkward spot, he felt. There would also be a problem of exhaust fumes from vehicles waiting on Melbourne Brae, but this appears to be an issue little regarded by Transportation Service.
Pete Lindsay reminded the meeting that the Lade Braes crossing had been discussed in April [April minutes 4.4.7]. He repeated that someone trying to cross there was killed a few years back. The road is much busier now than when that happened; at certain times of day it is difficult to cross. Hill starts were part of the driving test when he took his, he doubted that that had changed, and as a cyclist he was generally in bottom gear by that point on the hill anyway. Road users stopping for the crossing wasn’t really an concern on these grounds. The matter of fumes was more of an issue; he felt a zebra would be a better crossing in this location so road users would only need to stop when someone was actually crossing, not every time the lights were red, regardless of whether anyone was using the crossing. He did not think a crossing here should be opposed in principle.
Les Beech commented that if a crossing was put in place every time someone was killed there would be crossings all over the place. Donald Macgregor noted that there had only been two deaths of this nature in his time in St Andrews.
Joe Peterson supported a crossing partly to restrict speeds of traffic coming down the hill.
In view of the diverse opinions expressed Ian Goudie felt than a community council submission on the Melbourne Brae crossing would not be effective.
On the other crossing covered in Appendix B.2 item 2, at Hepburn Gardens / Craigtoun Road by Lawhead School, he said that recent road works at the site modelled some of the likely effects; it looked to be a more serious issue that first appeared to the planning committee. The location has poor visibility in both directions.
Cllr Sheila Black noted the difficulty in recruiting people for school crossing patrols in St Andrews. For pupils’ safety this meant more automatic crossings were inevitable and desirable.
Joe Peterson asked about a 20mph speed limit here as at other school entrances; it was a back entrance, but heavily used. Cllr Frances Melville said this was planned too.
Overall figures will be low this year as the system didn’t operate for the two weeks around the Open. He asked for it to run continuously so people get used to using it as a reliable service.
He asked if community council had made any progress in determining whether to make an offer to buy. Donald Macgregor said it would be discussed at the general purposes committee meeting [8.1.1. below].
Referring to a recent press report that 70% of premises in St Andrews met legislated standards for pricing and measures at a recent inspection in preparation for the Open, Ken Crichton asked why the people of St Andrews have to put up with poor standards, nearly a third not meeting standards, and presumably poor enforcement that allowed them to get away with it at other times. Did Trading Standards not bother unless there was something special on? He felt penalties for non-compliance should be higher.
Cllr Bill Sangster replied that they did bother but that there were limited resources in Trading Standards; they check premises as regularly as they can. He recalled they had a big push in St Andrews about six months ago, resulting in a report on off-sales. They do have to cover the whole of Fife.
Les Beech called for these to be extended, to prevent people crossing other than at designated crossing points. Too many pedestrians are crossing at the traffic islands instead. He asked if a body count would be needed to have them extended.
Cllr Bill Sangster was sympathetic. He had asked for the railings on Doubledykes Road to be extended back to the car park entrance but was told the pavements were too narrow. Joe Peterson backed some extension of the railings to control the students who will soon be using that route again.
Ian Goudie noted that community council had previously objected to railings on visual grounds. People who want to cross roads will do so; there is a limit to how much of a ‘nanny state’ should be imposed.
She commended Community Services gardens teams for their work reinstating the carpet beds and Petheram display after they were vandalised at the start of July, immediately after the July community council meeting.
She too had heard of a number of problems which she has taken up with the appropriate bodies. She reported a response from Transportation Services which said that at the debrief meeting “all parties involved, Fife Council, Fife Constabulary, British Transport Police, First Scotrail, GNER, Stagecoach and the R&A were all pleased with how well GolfLink had operated”. She commented that there was no representation of the people of St Andrews there – Fife Council was purely officers in this case, probably Transportation Service. She felt this was unsatisfactory and will press for changes.
The late Professor Whyte’s family have written to thank the Burgh for ringing the town bell at his funeral to mark his passing. Donald Macgregor confirmed this; he’d had a phone call from the family.
It is year since the problems. There was a report due last month; she is making enquiries as to where it is...
The Sheriff has upheld the appeal against the restraints on the van on the grounds that the decision process went against ‘natural justice’ as she and Cllr Bill Sangster take an interest in their school board and attend its meetings. The implication is that they may therefore be biased and should not have taken part in the licence decision on East Regulation Committee. She noted that if all the councillors who could attend school board had been barred the meeting would have been aquorate.
She is very concerned at the implications of this decision if councillors are not to attend any body where they may be influenced by the information they hear or can be presented as biased just because they offered advice on how to go about an objection, for instance. Take community councils: Fife councillors already have to be very careful over planning matters, mostly sitting and listening deadpan in case they are accused of pre-judgement later. This may have be extended to all aspects of community council business that impinges even slightly on any ‘quasi-judicial’ role for councillors. There are to be discussions with officers about the wider implications of this ruling. She fears that eventually St Andrews members will either not be able to take part in any discussions on St Andrews issues or will be forced to withdraw from any decision-making process to do with St Andrews.
A paper giving some old St Andrews street names was circulated. These had been taken from information given in the book on St Andrews street names by Bob Smart and Ken Fraser. She noted that while it was Fife Council policy, continued from NEF District Council, to include information on the former street names whenever a name plate needed to be replaced, this had not been happening. The reason seemed to be that there was no agreed list of old names. She has therefore prepared this list of mainly C15th names to see if it was agreeable to community council. The intention was not to revert to the old name, merely to include information on it (as at Bakers Lane / “formerly Baxter Wynd”). She asked for community council’s comments.
Pete Lindsay passed on Dennis Macdonald’s opposition, as he’d had to leave before the item came up. For his own part he understood this to be existing, if neglected, community council policy and thought it would add interest to the town centre street names.
The list:
| Current name | Former name |
|---|---|
| Abbey Street | Priors Wynd |
| Bridge Street | Maggie Murray’s Wynd |
| City Road/Alfred Place/Alexandra Place | Cow Wynd |
| College Street | Mercat Wynd |
| East Scores | Castlegait |
| Gregorys Lane | Dickiemans Wynd |
| Lade Braes Lane | Common Close |
| Logies Lane | Logies Wynd |
| Market Street | Mercatgait |
| Muttoes Lane | Bakehouse Close |
| North Castle Street | Fishergait |
| North Street | Northgait |
| Scores | Swallowgait |
| South Castle Street | Huxter Wynd |
| South Street | Southgait |
| Union Street | Foul Waste |
| West Burn Lane | Butler’s Wynd |
Meeting agreed to support the list
Agreed
She had been surprised to be approached by The Courier asking to her response to Fife Council’s decision not to progress the St Andrews link at this time. She had not heard of this decision. It turned out that the matter had been decided confidentially – as there were financial details and implications – at a strategic committee meeting, so naturally the councillors involved had not been able to speak to her about it. She was disappointed that officers had not kept her informed as they said they would on St Andrews rail matters and that she should learn of it through the press.
She has not yet seen the report on which the decision was based, but it appears that for some reason the old route was being put forward once more, which she found odd as previous reports had ruled it out. She has requested a copy of the papers under Freedom of Information legislation.
It seems that decision is not a ‘never’ just a ‘not yet’ with a go ahead for the much easier – there’s still track – Leven line. She’s happy for Leven, but she is very disappointed that Fife Council has got cold feet given the rail link’s position in the current Structure Plan.
(An administrative issue this does highlight in Fife Council is that there is no mechanism for elected members who are not on a strategic committee to be informed of confidential decisions taken which affect their locality.)
Ian Goudie asked if the meeting wished to make a response to this decision. It was agreed to approach the Chair to write a brief note to Fife Council protesting this decision and asking for information on the thinking behind it.
Chair to write?
Ken Crichton asked if she had any knowledge of potential developments here? No.
Having found the gate to the fenced off area of the trampoline pits open recently, and fearing an accident if someone fell into an open pit, he’d tried to report this to Fife Council. The people he wanted to speak to were in a meeting so he tried the Police. Their call centre needed a street name or postcode as East Bents were not in their database...
A letter had been circulated at the meeting concerning anti-social behaviour problems which the writer put down to drug users in the area. Kate Hughes, the St Andrews Locality Manager will be taking action.
Chair Donald Macgregor handed over the chair as he had to leave for another engagement; Vice-Chair Ian Goudie took over.
Meeting agreed that an information board would be a valid subject for a Common Good Fund application.
September
Bruce Ryan has met with the marketing company; they say they have done a lot of work in marketing the use of the Arms; at some unspecified point in future further income will accrue over and above the advance payment which covered the first three years. He hopes to have some more detailed reports from them in the next few months.
September
Pete Lindsay
7.30pm, 10 August, 15 Kinkell Terrace. Main item: Honoured/Honorary Citizen proposals remitted in July. Committee members plus any other interested member.
Bruce Ryan announced that due to unexpected changes to his circumstances he would be stepping down as treasurer in October, and leaving St Andrews and Community Council at the end of the year. He hoped that the advance notice would be helpful in ensuring a smooth handover to his successor.
Have applied for a grant of £150 towards maintenance and watering of the hanging baskets.
Agreed
Describing the overall position as extremely robust he suggested the community council should consider ways of using some of the money we have for the benefit of the people of St Andrews rather than letting it sit in a bank account.
Elise Methven suggested the children’s play areas of St Andrews needed serious attention. Ian Goudie added that planning committee had seen proposal for play area work at Balrymonth Court [appendix B.2.1]. Cllr Jane Ann Liston thought that it might be possible to use money put up by community council as pump-priming to draw funding from Fife Council and other bodies for improvements to these areas. Ian Goudie suggested it be remitted to Health Education & Welfare to look at drawing up proposals for work on play areas.
HE&W
Pete Lindsay suggested it might be necessary to add a new role of Correspondence Secretary. This will be discussed at the General Purposes meeting.
With the assistance (insistence) of Cllr Jane Ann Liston, a last minute entry was submitted on-line. Included below for information.
Pete Lindsay pointed out that item 4 in the report was, formally, wrong. Community council has not agreed to the HE&W Committee reformation since the inaugural meeting in March when other committees were agreed. However he would be happy if the meeting would regularise the position of the (at present) self-styled committee. Meeting agreed to do so at Ian Goudie’s suggestion.
HE&W now exists!
He made clear his exasperation over the suggestion that new members did not get information on the governing rules of community council. They did, and he has tidied up at least one copy of these papers left on the table still in their addressed envelopes at the end of the inaugural community council meeting.
The Fife Council Scheme for Community Councils, the Standing Orders for our meetings and the old constitution (no longer valid under the current Scheme and awaiting updating) are available on the community council web pages for downloading, or he will print and deliver them to off-line members on request.
Carole Tricker pointed out that nonetheless it was difficult for new members to find out when various committees met. Pete Lindsay conceded that this was a fair point; he’d be happy to include information on upcoming committee meetings in the agenda if committee chairs would pass it on.
Joe Peterson advised that judging for Beautiful Scotland in Bloom takes place on the afternoon of Tuesday 2 August.
He noted remarks from visitors this year about how clean St Andrews centre is looking, crediting this to Cllr Bill Sangster’s influence and Fife Council’s prompt action on his suggestions.
Submission to the Calor Community of the Year Competition by Jane Ann Liston & Pete Lindsay. Having outlined this the night before the deadline we thought we might as well submit it: nothing ventured, nothing gained. Bulleted lines are the competition’s suggested headings.
Fife Council’s consultations on draft Structure Plan and St Andrews & East Fife Local Plan – many responses from community and many new community organisations springing up
Community Council’s Planning committee – meets at least bimonthly – makes representations as statutory consultee on planning applications to Fife Council.
Community Council representation on various bodies, e.g. observer at St Andrews World Class meetings.
Lobbying Fife Council via the town’s 4 elected members – also liaising with Police, Scottish Water, BT etc
Monthly community council meetings provide a soapbox for people concerned about some aspect of life in St Andrews.
Regular Press coverage in regional and local papers (Courier and St Andrews Citizen), from news releases and journalists’ attendance at monthly CC meetings
Event newsletter, column in St Andrews in Focus magazine, Community Council newsletter produced as required. Secretary e-mailable. Community Council website includes minutes from 1997 onwards and Event listing online, linked to several other sites.
3 Community notice-boards for public use.
2 Community Council notice-boards.
Suggestions box in Fife Council office.
Pilgrim Foundation, to regenerate historic core; Preservation Trust, to protect built heritage; Green Belt Forum, to protect environment; Friends of Byre Theatre, Friends of Botanic Gardens, Friends of St Andrews Harbour, to raise money respectively for the theatre, botanic garden and the upkeep of the historic harbour.
Charities: St Andrews Common Good fund administered by Fife Council but with Community Council input – also other trust-style funds administered by Fife Council. Both available to individuals and group projects.
Royal Burgh of St Andrews Community Council Trust Fund – specifically for use for the community of St Andrews; similar terms to the Common Good Fund. Student Voluntary Service – carries out voluntary work in the town.
CC 200 Club – fund raising for small grants in the community
Town Hall, Victory Memorial Hall, East Sands Leisure Centre, library, museum – run by Fife Council; Sports Centre – run by University; St Andrews Preservation Trust museum; Cosmos Community Centre – run by management committee, mainly young people’s activities. 4 church halls, community use of Council schools. Students’ Association – services and activities for University students.
St Andrew’s Week festival: organised by local business, arts, community, local authority and tourist board, includes Art & Photographic Exhibition run by CC
StAnza: a national poetry festival
Senior Citizens’ Tea: organised by CC recreation committee in conjunction with the Students’ Association.
Bandstand concerts: held in renovated Victorian bandstand on summer Sunday afternoons.
Hogmanay Ceilidh: – organised by members of CC.
Floral baskets organised by St Andrews in Bloom group; carpet beds created by Fife Council.
Sandcastle competitions: weekly in summer, organised by Fife Council on Blue Flag West Sands.
CC – Young Citizen of the Year Award to recognise and reward community spirit
CC – Honoured/Honorary Citizen Scheme to recognise outstanding lifetime achievement in the community.