BTCT AGM on Nov 14th

[Joe K]

This is a letter I'm about to send to the trustees of the Barton & Tredworth Community Trust, such as they are now, having received no reply to the previous two. It's been cc'd to Richard Graham, who is, admittedly, pretty useless, and Jennie Dallimore, who seems to make a bit of an effort. I hope to see some results, then, in the next few days. I mean, how much longer can the trust get away with not distributing nomination forms?

If anyone is interested in making their own enquiries, the email address is [e-mail], or you can contact the chairwoman at [e-mail], or the secretary at [e-mail].

The trust doesn't have a website anymore, because they stopped paying Softdata Ltd for its upkeep, and didn't respond to the company's emails either.

Hi,

OK, this is the last email I received from the BTCT, despite the two emails, copied below, which I sent, on Sept 19th, the other on October 18th.

Today, I visited the BTD offices, to see if nomination forms were available. I know that no forms were given out at all for the last AGM, supposedly because the committee weren't 'sure' if the trust would continue (although they have managed to carry on for another year, despite being well below the number required to run the trust, or even hold quorate meetings, without apparently feeling any need to co-opt new trustees).

David Mitchell at BTD, however, is still waiting for those forms, or any documentation.

I'm asking, therefore, how long the trustees feel they can wait before making these forms, and other documents, available?

Also, do the residents who nominate potential trustees, as well as the nominees themselves, have to be members of the trust, and if so, do residents still have time to request membership? To whom, and at what address, would they make that request now, anyway? Which brings us back to that membership problem mentioned below.

Cheers, Joe

PS, remember when AGMs used to held in May?


19/09/2012 10:00:42:

Hi David,

Serendipitously, I happened to bump in to Carol Francis while visiting the library to peruse Monday's Echo, and she revealed that you were even now sending out an email about the long promised meeting. From the above address, I presume, but I'll be popping into the BTD offices later, in case not.

I'm still interested to know why I've had no response to my nomination as a trustee after more than a year, and no invitation to, or minutes for, meetings which, due to the number of trustees (7, with no advertising campaign to attract co-optees) should not in any event be taking place at all. Perhaps this will be revealed at the meeting when it does take place.

Cheers, Joe


18/10/2012 12:52:10:

Hi,

I intended to visit the Enterprise Centre offices during the week to see if any documents had been prepared for the meeting, but as I happened to meet Carol Francis on Friday, who says that the meeting won't happen until the accountants have been finished, I would guess that there is no date for it yet, and until there is, little paperwork can be printed.

In lieu of nomination papers, I would just like to ask, once more, why my own nomination as trustee last year was ignored? I know the AGM wasn't quorate, but the committee claimed (wrongly) that I was only co-opted onto the committee first time around so, with far fewer members than the required 14, co-opting me at the very next committee meeting, as well as initiating a drive to find other candidates for co-option, would have been the only responsible thing to do. What has the committee been doing about its membership problem for over a year now?

Cheers, Joe

[Joe K]

I see Jerry Jenkison has died

Yes, he was treated 'shabily' by the 'Barton & Tredworth association' (Barton & Tredworth Community Trust?), but so was I. When I stood up to them, Jerry described me as 'fragile minded'. Then they sacked him, as they sacked the capable Patrick Samson before Jerry. Regrets (for actions not taken, causes not defended?) can eat away at people.

Carol Francis and Bren McInerney continue to get away with refusals to answer for their misconduct, for now, even employing the police to try to dissuade questions, and now Saj Patel is as heavily implicated, while trying to shrug off responsibility. The truth will out.

[Deleted]

Well, regrets don't seem to have hurt Carol too much, despite the fact that she claimed to be dying absolutely ages ago - April last year, wasn't it? From which we have to assume that Carol doesn't regret the destruction of the Trust.

[Joe K]

It's a crying shame that after slinking away from responsibility for the failure of the BTCT in such a cowardly manner, the Francis' (Carol and especially Derrick) still crave a power base, and are still handed it on a plate. This will only change when people in the ward stop kidding themselves (and more importantly, stop letting the police try and kid them) that it's only ethnic minorities who are being failed in Gloucester.

Can you believe that the replacement for Tim Wood, booted sideways to take charge of Project Solace and the 'Avenger Task Force' (ooh lah dee dah), is Matt Puttock, who revealed his complete ignorance of procedure and the laws he was supposed to uphold by allowing me to be assaulted by Damian Lea over a piece of paper, then arresting me for the crime of upsetting Philip Lowery by reading said public document?

You probably won't know that an 'In Touch' meeting was supposed to take place between 4 and 6pm yesterday, but was a complete no-show for the police, with Increase The Peace claiming that the police never hold these events (there have been previous events?) on a Wednesday, despite photographic evidence of the poster from the 'fayre', which I put on the Tredworth Facebook page

This is the kind of accountability we get from our local rozzers.

[Joe K]

Speaking of Puttock, and his threat to arrest me for theft becaise I picked up and read a document the chairman had said would be available to anyone to read at the end of the meeting, I just heard the definition of theft on Radio 4's 'Brief Lives'...

www.lawteacher.net/criminal-law/lecture-notes/theft-lecture.php

"A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it."

I knew instinctively that Puttock's accusation was ridiculous, which is why I was prepared to let him proceed with the arrest, and consequently be dropped in the brown stuff at the police station. Instead of that happening, though, Damian Lea then tried to pull the document from my grasp, tearing it in two. I doubt any of the people who told Karen Horsley, when quesioned for the local resolution process, that the police did everything right actually remember any of that, the half-assed justifications for interfering or the prior assault on my person.

But you can't win with the police, They write down what suits them.

[Deleted]

That link to the Tredworth Facebook page is just the sign in. I can't find the latest stuff for the page, just 2013.

[Joe K]

It works fine for me, but then, I am signed in already.

Visited Richard Graham's surgery at Calton Junior School this evening (I requested an appointment with Holly Piper, whatever her role is).

I would say that what he had to say about the blog was balls, but I suspect he would consider that 'abuse'. I suppose if we take a leaf out of his rather judgemental book, as well as that of Barton police, we should consider his Westminster selfie, and illegal parking, to be 'abuse' also. Bet he won't see it that way, though...

[Joe K]

Carol Francis is still alive and well, although Paul Harries has taken a bit of a knock. Terrible shame.

I guess I've mentioned that BTD Ltd sent me a letter (though the signature was impossible to make out, and I'll have to go in and ask about that), saying that the 'trustees' of BTCT were having talks with the Charity Commission. The commission are also having talks with BTD and Mcinerney, about BTCT's status, and unanswered questions, so maybe the confusion will be dispelled, and blame apportioned,finally...

www.visit-gloucestershire.co.uk/boards/topic/9387-barton-tredworth-community-trust-financial-crisis/#entry68390

[Joe K]

As I have no reason to think Paul Harries isn't now a trustee, if the trust does still exist, I'll be interested to hear his view about all this. As well as why he doesn't seem, after several years, to have conducted the investigation into the committee's treatment of me that he and Francis promised at that last AGM...

[Joe K]

Now Paul is one of my 'victims'. I wonder how he feels harmed, when he told me not to visit his flat, and I complied instantly, and why he doesn't just ask Bren McInerney if the trust committee still exists or not? And if it does, why Paul isn't on it? Or me, for that matter...

If Paul is serious about taking action in co-ordination with the community, I look forward to hearing about it at the open meeting, supposedly taking place on April 22nd.

[Joe K]

Obviously, I've been keeping an eye on Eddy's boards, by the way. Oh dear, what a mess. Where did everybody go..?

[Eddy]

Where did the one person you talk to (Kay) go?

[Joe K]

Oh dear if what I said was 'slagging' Eddy off, what is 'Glevum_Girl' doing? Slagging by remote? I have no choice but to discuss the Gloucestershire Boards, and their plummeting usage, here. I'm not doing so because I simply haven't got the guts to speak on a forum where no-one is prevented from speaking, and I'm not hiding my identity behind a screen-name.

Actually, 'trolling by remote' is more like it. I should open a new nomination. Still plenty of room for another 'disgusting troll', G_G...

[Joe K]

The really sad part is that while this dwindling handful of posters continue to snipe at me, BTD/BTCT continue to get away with it.

Still, I can reproduce this letter (I can reproduce anything publicly, I have no secrets about my dealings):


Tue, Feb 17, 2015 11:45 am:

Dear Mr Kilker

I refer to you correspondence with us in relation to the Barton and Tredworth Community Trust.

I have written to the former trustees to seek clarification on a number of points. Once I have received this information I will write to you further.

Yours sincerely


Andrew Ashcroft

First Contact




In other words, I'm still looking for answers, and somehow, people are still helping with that, rather than ignoring me, despite my supposed 'belligerent attitude'. People might want to check their history...

(or just stop pretending that they're not reading this, and ask questions too)

[Joe K]

Hi

Indeed, I started investigating BTCT shortly after Joe started having issues with them. But it was the way Joe went about it that got him banned.

I did try to help him in the early days, but stopped when he turned on me personally. I have always agreed with Joe on the issue(s), just never on his (Joe's) methods.

Thanks
Paul Harries

Barton & Tredworth Community Trust Financial Crisis

'Turned on [Paul] personally'.

This would be the bit where I said that Paul needed 'to wake up to how little influence you have with the committee'. That was my honestly held opinion, based on how little he had actually accomplished (besides 'sorting policies, providing information, being supportive'), but Paul regarded it as an 'insult', and in increasingly strident terms, told me not visit his flat (which I never had attempted to, from that moment) or send him emails. I dismissed the last instruction, as an 'official responder' cannot, in my view, choose to ignore residents, and anyone can judge who, in the exchange of emails below, is being reasonable and open about the facts, or otherwise, but after my last email, at the top, Paul apparently went to the local police and got them to issue a Personal Information Notice to me which conflated visiting his flat with sending him emails, so that it looked on the page as if I had been doing the latter despite being told not to, rather than only the former. I asked the police to rescind this order or clarify it, and they refused, obviously, given that they will not issue Gary with such a PIN, only telling me to block him, which they evidently didn't say to Paul. These are the grounds of my complaint against Gloucestershire constabulary for biased behaviour, which were, of course, dismissed.

The only thing I've removed below is Rachel's email address (as well as Kay's), not her words. To this date, she has never received a response, and still, no newsletter has ever been distributed, which I was told was Paul's job...

Note: on close examination of the email addresses for each email I sent, I surmise that what actually 'insulted' Paul was the fact that I had begun to CC a bunch of other people from the committee, the council and the police when I said it (I had concluded, from July 31st, that a private dialogue was a complete waste of time). I may have hurt his feewings...

Of course, none of this justifies Paul breaking his promise re the 'investigation', and not keeping up the pressure on BTCT/BTD, as I am doing. Is anyone even aware that BTD have now given up the lease of the Barton Community Centre, and sold off the office equipment over a week ago? Are they also going to slip away in the night?



Sun, Aug 4, 2013 7:26 pm

Humour me, Paul. Just who would you report me for 'harassment' to, if it were even true?

Let's be clear about reality. The reality is that you don't tell me what to do, or who I can or cannot send (or receive, since you seem so keen to keep replying) emails. People who (supposedly) refuse to discuss issues with me in any way don't get to make demands of me.

And have you spoken to Rachel yet? Not since the last time she checked her emails, apparently. When you do, I won't need to be involved (though you may not find her as polite as I have been).

And finally, what does 'don't worry - You might not even have that' mean? It sounds awfully much like a threat, which is about as abusive as anyone can get. Are you threatening me, Paul?

Time for you to step away from the computer, I think, before you really get yourself, and the partnership, into trouble.



In a message dated 04/08/2013 17:35:17 GMT Daylight Time, [e-mail] writes:
Hi

You seem to have no idea of reality - you don't even seem to understand English.

I am now reporting you for harassment.

As for Rachel - I don't report to you - you are simply not involved. I only speak to HER.

As for the Street thing - don't worry. You might not even have that.

When I said do not contact me - that means DO NOT CONTACT ME.

Paul Harries


From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Sent: Sunday, 4 August 2013, 12:42
Subject: Re: A message

Is the truth that unpalatable?

Again, why do you want to join the Streetclub group I created? Am I supposed to approve your request or reject it?

Are you stalking me?

But more importantly,

1. As 'official responder', are you actually going to respond to Rachel's complaint/appeal yourself now?

2. What happened with this Magna Carta tosh? Or, let me guess. You suggested to Phillip Lowery that Rachel should be allowed to 'face her accusers', he said no, and you meekly accepted that. And Tony Ward's whole 'we couldn't have those meetings because you refused to attend (I didn't actually)' claim never happened (although you were there and heard it too).

Reality isn't for you, Paul, better stick to Dungeons & Dragons instead. At least there are no councillors wanting to punch you there...



In a message dated 04/08/2013 02:00:09 GMT Daylight Time, [e-mail] writes:
Hi

Just SHUT UP!

If you enter the premises again you WILL BE ARRESTED.

You have been warned.

As I said before DO NOT CONTACT ME AGAIN.

Hope that was in plain enough English

Paul Harries


From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Sent: Saturday, 3 August 2013, 15:11
Subject: Re: A message

You haven't 'sorted' any policy, least of all the complaints policy, your attitude to information is 'I can't say anything just now', and who exactly are you supporting? The Man? You are such a disappointment. Is it really abusive to state that view? Or free speech?

Tell your theories about trespass to the judge. Please.

I have been lied about and lied about and lied about, and no-one, least of all you, will object, in any way that actually changes anything, anyway. A little, or a lot of truth shouldn't hurt anyone who has nothing to hide, should it? And I have been given no incentive to practise your kind of discretion.

But if it's 'goodbye', why do you want to join the Jersey Road Streetclub? Tony Ward would say (testily) that 'has you don't live here, you 'as no right to be a member'. Me, I'm more tolerant (I would, for example, have been happy for new members of the BTCT like Kalsoom Butt to become trustees, as we needed more) but I would like to know what contribution you intend to make...



In a message dated 02/08/2013 22:29:09 GMT Daylight Time, [e-mail] writes:
Hi

I've been integral part of much of the work behind the scenes, sorting policies, providing information, being supportive.

And you entered the private property where my flat is located. The fact that the front door wasn't locked is irrelevant - you were trespassing.

And you're doing enough mud dragging for everyone in the ward already. We don't need to add to the pile.

Goodbye
Paul Harries

From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, 1 August 2013, 15:45
Subject: Re: A message

You show me what you have actually accomplished while on the partnership committee, apart from agreeing with everything they say, and I'll re-consider my remark.

And you did say you had too much on your 'plate' to stay on the committee, but perhaps you've forgotten saying that.

Of course it's not up to me, but I can point out when somebody is bringing the partnership into disrepute with reckless behaviour, just as much as anyone else can. I just don't have the power to be heard, while the committee can drag my name through the mud. It's still a bad joke that the chair and secretary won't speak to Rachel directly (as the chair won't speak to the Citizen. Perhaps that's your job, too?). And did you actually send your 'official' email to Rachel at all?

And by the by, when I have I ever been on your 'property'?



In a message dated 01/08/2013 15:31:32 GMT Daylight Time, [e-mail] writes:
Hi

" You need to wake up to how little influence you have with the committee," for a start.

I never said I wouldn't be part of the BTNP - its one of the few good things that I can do for this community. And you seem to mixing BTCT & BTNP issues, again.

As a committee member I AM entitled to act on behalf of the BTNP in certain matters. It is NOT up to you tyo decide what they are.

Please do not contact me again on this matter. I will contact your wife after the nexrt committee meeting.
Paul Harries

From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, 1 August 2013, 13:47
Subject: Re: A message

How did I 'insult' you Paul. Did I accuse you of 'criminal activities', for example?

If there's insult here, it's the insulting of our intelligence in suggesting that you might be the conduit for an 'official' response. Unless they (officially) made you official responder? Will you accept that it isn't appropriate for you to make such a claim, just as it's farcical to have a complaints procedure which isn't open to anyone the chairman and secretary don't like, and therefore rule out from making a complaint. Would you agree that every complaint should be heard, or the procedure is a bad joke?

You can't be blamed for your memory, but you can be blamed for your judgement. Seriously, with no intent of an insult, if that is impaired, you should never have agreed to be on the committee again, especially as you told me before the AGM that you didn't intend to. After all your warnings about the risk of financial penalties in being involved with the BTCT, sticking with rogues, fool and 'yes men', showed bad judgement, or just failure to recall what has gone before.

I wish you could remember these words at the next meeting.



In a message dated 01/08/2013 12:58:49 GMT Daylight Time, [e-mail] writes:
Hi

If you keep up insulting me, then I'll just ban you from my contacts and from my property.

Paul Harries
BTNP Committee



From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, 1 August 2013, 12:04
Subject: Re: A message

Seriously, Paul, you're neither the chair nor the secretary, so no, I don't count it as an 'official acknowledgement of the email', and I doubt Rachel will, either.

Unless you are also going to start dealing with the complaints I've made to the partnership about the behaviour of the chair and secretary, and send me a copy of the last full constitution, or even the present unfinished and therefore non-applicable one? Or explain why two policemen saw fit as part of their duties to bar me from attending the meeting yesterday evening when it was not a criminal matter?

You need to wake up to how little influence you have with the committee, Paul. If you had any you wouldn't have been allowed, or probably even wanted to answer, because you'd know what the score is. You haven't even said Rachel will be allowed to attend that meeting in September. Again, pronouncements will be made from 'on high', and with no opportunity to challenge them. No partnership has ever survived as much on the unwillingness of the officers to accept how irrelevant to its community they have become, rather than welcoming the views of everyone in that community. No partnership has had better reason to follow Moreland's and Elmbridge's (and Barnwood's?) into dissolution, but bizarrely does not do so. But we know that without a partnership, an unaccountable, unquestionable quango blocking residents' complaints and queries, the council would be legally obliged to give answers to awkward questions eventually, and that can't be allowed. Well, maybe you aren't aware of this...

But if you think you can speak for the partnership, perhaps you can explain why a meeting which Tim Wood says was not open to the public was advertised to the public on the partnership's Twitter account (albeit with the wrong time given), with an exhortation to '#getinvolved'? Just further evidence that someone more competent needs to manage that account? And other public communications?

Joe

PS remember how confident you were that the newsletter would be sent out before the AGM? How many months ago was that, now? Three years since the last one?



In a message dated 31/07/2013 23:24:14 GMT Daylight Time, [e-mail] writes:
Hi

I've sent the Chair an email regarding the situation and as a Committee Member I can tell you I'm bringing it up as an Agenda item at our September meeting. More than that I cannot say just yet.
(Count this as an official acknowledgement of he email).

I'll send you details as I get them.

Thanks
Paul Harries
BTNP Committee

From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Sent: Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 15:36
Subject: Re: A message

Hi Paul,

As you promised, at least two days go, to advise Phillip Lowery that he should have had the courtesy to respond to Rachel's email, and this still hasn't happened, this is a reminder to all that at the last partnership meeting you both agreed that she should have a response if she wrote to the partnership about the way she was treated. I don't think it's acceptable that she should have to wait until the next partnership meeting in September, as it could be a long wait for very little action (will she even be allowed to attend, or will it be like April 19th, when our presence was not required, completely the opposite of when Tony Ward was demanding my presence at premature disciplinary hearings for them to happen, and be minuted, at all?). It's still less acceptable to not receive a reply.

While I'm writing this, a reminder that the police policy panel/Street Reps meeting is happening today, starting at 6pm at the Barton Community Centre. I do mean to attend, if only to establish my right as a resident and as a Street Rep for Gloucester City Homes to do so, and if anyone wishes to challenge this right, they should state their reasons now, as if they do so at the meeting they will be the only ones causing disruption.

As Rachel would like to attend as well, it may be that we won't be able to stay for the Street Reps portion, so apologies in advance if necessary. I should also like to put it on record that I fully meant to attend the previous meeting (for which I would like minutes), but was told by Pat Hurley on my arrival that I was 'not invited', despite the meeting being open to residents. I should also like it put on record that Timothy Wood then backed up Pat Hurley, threatening me with actions, up to and including arrest, if I didn't leave. I am confident, having made enquiries, that this was well beyond his powers, so I don't expect a repeat performance from either individual.

Looking forward, in particular, to hearing of the status of our emergency planning procedure, and what has happed in the two years since I put the notification for it in the last newsletter, over two and a half years ago.

Cheers, Joe Kilker


In a message dated 28/07/2013 11:58:09 GMT Daylight Time, [e-mail] writes:
Hi Paul,

Rachel is still waiting for a response from the partnership to this. Shouldn't she have received one by now?

Joe

From: rachel
To: [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
Sent: 23/07/2013 03:39:34 GMT Daylight Time
Subj: A message

Dear BTNP members

Paul has assured me if I wrote this message I would be heard.

A while ago now, I was sent a mail of a meeting that took about me
without my prior knowledge. A disciplinary meeting that was held at the
same time as Joe's was. This is not constitutional, and a separate
meeting should have been held. I believe you are tarring me with the
same brush as Joe and this really isn't acceptable. I've taken a long
while to write this email - for many reasons - but mainly because I've
been very upset about this outcome.

I should have been told what I was accused of, and invited to defend
myself. I have done nothing wrong save a heated discussion which both
Pat Hurley and Philip Lowery were also doing, so I take it that reason
cannot be the case. I've also received no minutes for the meeting. I
would also point out that the minutes for the committee meeting of 10th
of April were inaccurate and there were many statements put in that were
opposite of each other!

I would like another meeting where this disciplinary hearing can be held
properly, and I can stand up for myself.

yours sincerely


Rachel Kilker