Creek Consortium: dis-appointing?

The secretary and chair of the Faversham Creek Consortium have excused themselves from writing to ordinary members who signed a resolution to dissolve, and from paying room hire for a meeting to vote on the resolution, on the grounds that the Consortium has no funding.

This is what it says about funding in the constitution: “The running expenses of the Consortium and the Management Group will be provided by contributions from the Appointing Bodies (subject to agreement) and other donations that may be received from time to time. The amount of the contributions from the Appointing Bodies shall be agreed at the start of each financial year.”

It goes on to say that the monies will be held on behalf of the Consortium by Swale Borough Council, and that a report on annual income and expenditure shall be submitted for approval at each Annual General Meeting.

Why has none of this been done? Can anyone remember having seen a financial report at an AGM? There is certainly no mention of one in the minutes for 2012, 2013 or 2014.

The Appointing Bodies, which each appoint one member of the management group, are Swale Borough Council (Mike Cosgrove), Faversham Town Council (Nigel Kay) and Faversham Municipal Charities (Andrew Osborne). All the other members of the group are elected or co-opted.

If the Appointing Bodies are appointing members, should they not be providing funding? If they are not providing funding, should they be entitled to appoint members? Who is appointing these three people, and where are the appointments minuted? Or are they appointing themselves, year after year?

1 thought on “Creek Consortium: dis-appointing?

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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