While these minuets are perhaps not as accurate as some people may be used to, we feel that we have captured the essence, and flow of the meeting, along with all the major points and decisions made. We have tried to ensure that we remain impartial, with regards to peoples opinions, and that we have not misrepresented anyone’s views.

With this in mind please consider this document a draft, and feel free to make additions or corrections. I can only apologise if we missed anyone’s comments, got your name wrong (or simply don’t know it). And especially if we have missed anything important. If any of this is true for you, please understand it was not intentional.

I will distribute amended minutes before the next meeting if you make corrections soon.

At the end of this document you will also find a summary of the meeting. We have tried to consolidate the major points, so that we can form questions from them, and build the agenda for the next meeting

Introduction by Mark Jones.

Mark explained that the meeting was not called by MVMP (Meden Valley Making Places) or MDC (Mansfield District Council). He then went on to explain the reasons the meeting was being facilitated using consensus decision making (see attachment). These reasons being fairness and the ability to let everyone have an equal say. Mark then went on to explain the fact that he had created Pleasley Hill People’s Network simply to be able to put the meeting on, and that it could either become a community group, or an umbrella name for many groups. It was explained that to become a formal group in the eyes of the council that a constitution must be adopted.

Finally Mark went on to explain that this meeting was to discuss housing, and further issues would be chosen at the end of the meeting to be discussed at the next meeting.

Discussion regarding housing

Lizzy Bacon

Lizzy said that she had spoken to MVMP and they said they would be at the meeting

Mark Jones

Mark explained that he believed there had been confusion over dates and that they had muddled up two separate meetings.

Charlene ? (if this was you please confirm your name!)

Said that she wanted to move from the area.

Mark Jones

Asked how many others wanted to move.

(show of hands estimated at less than 25%)

Mark then went on to explain some of features proposed in the new development, such as cycle paths and eco homes


Asked why they (MVMP/MDC) don’t tell us

Mark Jones

Explained that the impression he is getting is that MVMP want to talk to a group rather than individuals.


Pointed out that the Pleasley Newsletter said they would talk to individuals.

At this point there was a lot of talking, Both Mavis and Lizzy spoke and the result was that it has been indicated to residents that it could be up to 18 months before anything was done. And that it would be done stage by stage.

Mark Jones

Agreed to this and pointed out it was similar to the situation at Brownlow Road.

Lizzy Bacon

Pointed out that monies (£96,000) had now been allocated by the council. This was a reference to the recent Chad article.


Stated that the council won’t do repairs (because they want to fix all the problems with the redevelopment?).

At this point a proposal was made that should a group be formed, that it would put pressure on the council to carry out their duties as landlord, and if residents have any problems, they can come to the group to enact this pressure.

Next the discussion wandered a little, and there was talk of other issues in the area such as lack of facilities. Ideas such as a park and co-operative businesses were mentioned.


Brought up the issue of overgrown gardens.

Mark Jones

Suggested that the community could manage the gardens. There were objections to this, such as why should we, and that is why we pay taxes.

Mrs Sarizon?

MDC are responsible for looking after gardens, and pointed out that it is in the tenants charter?


Pointed out that it’s not just the fact that the gardens are overgrown, but that they are full of rubbish.

Mavis Holmes

Stated that she had the council clear the gardens in the past, and that if we request it they will send someone out.

At this point we proposed and agreed that we should also put pressure on the council to clear the gardens and clean up the houses.

We next moved back to the housing, and tested to see how many people want to stay in the area. We found that an overwhelming majority of people did want to stay. It was then stated that the developers (ie. MDC MVMP and any other involved organisation)need to communicate more, specifically about what the development will entail.

Mark Jones

Explained that so far the only information is what the council have asked developers to consider, and that a potential developer simply had to show they considered options, they did not have to implement all the councils recommendations.

We next discussed the affordability of all groups towards moving back to the area. And we resolved to raise questions on the affordability and ownership of social housing. And also on if the right to buy would be carried over to new houses, and objections were raised against rent to buy. The result of this was that we would fight to ensure that moving back was within the financial means of the residents.

Mark Jones

Proposed that we should officially set up a group.

Mavis Holmes

Pointed out that before we could form a group we needed a constitution

Mark Jones

Agreed that this was the case and explained that a draft constitution had been drafted, that it would be distributed with the minutes of the meeting and could be discussed and possibly ratified at the next meeting.

Lady stood to right of room (Angie?)

Asked if there was a committee

Mark Jones

Explained that this meeting was to begin the process of establishing a group, and suggested that the group could move away from the traditional form of committee, with elected representatives. Instead to remain as an open group where all could come and put forward their views, and where needed that we could put forward a delegate rather than a representative. The difference being that a delegate has no power to make decisions on behalf of the group, and must always return to seek further instruction when unable to further our position. Also suggested that no one person should hold power and if people wanted, they could be trained up and chair meetings, so that positions of power could be rotated.

Mavis Holmes

Questioned the wisdom of rotating a chair person, and said that we need a strong chairperson and treasurer etc.


Said that she felt that previous meetings and groups had not been able to resolve some issues.

At this point there was a lot of talking, and some of the previous points were re-iterated. The discussion turned to who would take on much of the work or dealing with the council. Mark Jones pointed out that he was already dealing with them and making progress simply by trying to establish a group.

Lizzy Bacon

Asked if the result of the last few moment of discussion was that every one should put our ideas, questions and opinions to the group, and if Mark Jones would act as the delegate for now.

Mark Jones

Agreed to this, but also indicated he was aware of the perception that all the power was being placed in his hands, and wanted to share it out more. But agreed that until the group is more established he would take on any work that needed to be done.

There was a bit more talking at this point and several people shouted comments of support for the ideas so far. The question of whether or not a group could operate in this manner was raised and it was pointed out that we had already discussed several issues and made a few decisions, and that the process was already working.

Nathan Gould

Pointed out that the housing must meet new standards by 2010

There were a few moments of discussion about the fact that repairs seem to be on hold for the re-generation, and that they should not be considered as the same issue. That repairs and full services should be maintained up until the very last moment.

Christine Allen

Asked why some houses could not be left up. It was mentioned that perhaps some of Hillmoor Street would be.

Mrs Sarizon?

Explained how she felt these houses were of a better quality than can be expected of a new build. She elaborated on how she felt that the current houses were solidly built, and felt many new developments were a bit flimsy, and suggested that looks were not everything.

There was much discussion, including the stigma attached to the area. And it was agreed that people who want the housing to remain should also be heard properly. And that we should include in the next meeting a full discussion regarding keeping the existing housing, or supporting the redevelopment. It was pointed out that Mark Jones having met MVMP before the next meeting will put forward these questions so that we have more information to consider.

It was then fully agreed by all present that a group should be established, based on the principles discussed so far. Namely that for now we will have open meetings, and continue to make decisions by consensus. We then further agreed in principal to hold regular meetings, and that Monday evenings were acceptable. The date for the next meeting was set for the 17th August, at 7pm. There was also the suggestion of catch up meetings for people who missed main meetings.

Ideas were then requested for better ways to get information to people, and many people offered to help with leafleting.

Discussion of Agenda Points for next meeting

We then had a quick session of suggestions for agenda points for the next meeting. We wrote these down on the board. And we had a simple majority vote for the 5 topics people felt were the most important. The selected topics were:

  • Housing

  • Empty Gardens

  • Facilities for children of all ages.

  • Rubbish in the area

  • Repairs

The topics that were not chosen were:

  • Anti-social behaviour

  • Policing

  • Dog mess

The meeting was then drawn to a close.


There was much positive feedback from the meeting, and much enthusiasm for a new groups potential. We have gone over everything that was said, and tried to bring them in to concise issues.

Things we agreed on:

  • That a group should be formed, and that meetings should be open, and that everyone should have an equal say.

  • That this group should put pressure on the council to deliver services

  • That we should press for more information on the re-development

Main Points:

  • We as a community require more information from MDC / MVMP.

  • We require more support now. We expect delivery of council services, and feel we have been neglected.

  • We want to know more about the types of houses that they plan to build. Including size, build type, rooms, quality of build.

  • We want to know how they plan to make it affordable and realistic for people to move back into the area.

  • We want to be involved in any planning process, be consulted on decisions and have our say in the future of our homes.

The next meeting:

Based on what we discussed and the topics we chose the proposed draft agenda for the next meeting is

  1. Minutes of previous meeting

  2. Matters arising

  3. Housing: Discussion of constitution

  4. Housing: Discussion of new information and existing vs new housing

  5. Housing: Discussion of Repairs situation, and what we can do about it.

  6. General Area: Empty gardens, Rubbish and what to do about it.

  7. General Area: Facilities and Activities

  8. Any other business.

As a side note, until we formally establish, we are unable to get funding for refreshments, so we are going to recommend bringing a bottle of water with you!

Some things to consider for the next meeting.

Thing number 1

Some of us expressed the desire to keep existing housing. Is this because we are attached to the current houses and their history, or is it a question of quality of new houses? Would it be that if you had more say in the development and the types of houses that are built would you be more open to the redevelopment?

And from the other perspective. As somebody that would like to see the re-development go ahead. Is this because you simply hate the look and stigma of the area? If the area was much tidier, in a better state of repair, and more occupied would you still want the re-development to go ahead?

There are conflicting opinions among us on this, but I believe that with more information from MDC / MVMP and discussion among us we can find common ground and a solution that suits us all.

Thing number 2

At times our meeting got a little heated or loud. Please remember that by letting each person have their say, not only can you more fully consider your response, but we get the chance to write down what you said! And while I know sometimes these issues can get us a little on edge, please remember that the issues we are discussing affect us all. It is in all of our best interests to leave any personal arguments or opinions we have of each other at the door, and work together to find solutions to our problems.


3 Responses to “Minuets of Pleasley Hill People’s Network public meeting 03-08-09”

  1. 1 Robert
    October 8, 2009 at 10:25 pm

    hi Mark
    can you let me know when the next meeting is, as have few family problem and lost track and couldn’t find it on here.


  2. October 13, 2009 at 12:09 pm

    Yeah, it’s this coming Monday (19th).

  3. February 19, 2015 at 11:34 am

    I do believe all the ideas you have presented to your post.
    They are very convincing and will definitely work. Still, the posts are very brief for novices.
    May you please extend them a little from subsequent time?
    Thank you for the post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Post Archive

May 2019
« Apr    

Blog Stats

  • 5,029 hits

%d bloggers like this: