'Minutes of the recent Policy and Planning meeting (21 December 2009) recorded that the Town Clerk is proposing to retire in March 2010, subject to details being resolved. The current Deputy Town Clerk, Martin Ayres, would be appointed Acting Town Clerk for a minimum period of six months'.
Is Mr Leeson of retirement age then? If not, it will be interesting to know on what grounds he is 'proposing' to retire. This is particularly relevant given public sector stringencies especially when early retirement is almost always the most expensive option for an employer.
Posted by Anonymous to swanageview at 1:23 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
78 comments:
I understand that Mr Leeson is retiring on the grounds of "efficiency of service". I believe this means that it is considered that the Council can manage without his services, so providing beneficial cost savings to the town. An argument was made that his workload has considerably reduced following the sale of the caravan park.
My own personal opinion is that this is fine if he wants to retire. However, I believe that there is still plenty of work to be done in managing the town. I had hoped that once the caravan park had gone, more time could be spent on other town matters, previously given insufficient attention. I imagine that more resources will be required before long.
We need action so an elected Mayor/Town Clerk would be good
I rather doubt this could happen. There would be all sorts of conflicts of interest. The Town Clerk has a role above/apart from the Council, which elects one of its members to serve as Mayor, but appoints a non-elected employee as Town Clerk.
I am not sure I 'buy' The Postman's account in its entirety, as AL was in the Town's employ many years before the sale of SBV was mooted. At the time of his appointment it had a full time general manager. I will agree than there is less to manage now that SBV is out of the town's hands, and that AL's and MA's full time roles are perhaps not justified.
However, AL told me about a year ago that when the SBV saga was over, he wanted to retire from the town. I am sure it is his wish and his choice, irrespective of anything else, but his early retirement will be expensive for the town. At least there is the money for this now that SBV is off the books.
STC employees participate in the DCC superannuation fund. STC does not have its own scheme.
Town clerks and mayors have different functions. By the way, what action that the town/parish council has the power to undertake do we need? More geraniums in Sandpit Fields, new white lines in the car parks. Thats about the limit of their empire.
I was having a bad day, until I read this news. I'ts great aint it!
10.35
It's quite old news. I new before Christmas.
'My own personal opinion is that this is fine if he wants to retire.'
Hmmmm, not sure that this would be a good enough reason elsewhere particularly for an employee who is apparently so far off retirement age.
'Efficiency of service' will therefore be a nonsense if the post of Town Clerk is intended to continue after Mr Leeson's departure.
"5:16 PM At least there is the money for this now that SBV is off the books."
Hopefully the £30,000 annual rental STC receive will be on the books for the next 105 years. Was the information ever freed as to whether this amount is linked to inflation ?
"5:16 PM but his early retirement will be expensive for the town."
Could the costs be explained please ?
"Efficiency of service' will therefore be a nonsense if the post of Town Clerk is intended to continue after Mr Leeson's departure."
I thought the same on first reading. But what may happen is that the post of Assistant or Deputy Town Clerk (Martin Ayers) might be the post that disappears. It would make sense.
"5:16 PM but his early retirement will be expensive for the town."
In my profession, which is in the public sector, early retirement is permitted at 55. It IS more expensive for the employer than working to 62, the normal age of retirement.
£30000 is not linked to inflation.So in 25 years it will be worth virtualy nothing
Isn't it strange. There is one set of poster who haste to rubbish anything done by the various levels of council but when I suggested in another thread, that politicians who advocate devolving more power to councils either did not mean it or were simply misguided not one of the critics of councils pitched in expressing agreement. Its as if different threads were in parallel universes, fated never to connect.
Rather like our two policical parties??
'In my profession, which is in the public sector, early retirement is permitted at 55. It IS more expensive for the employer than working to 62, the normal age of retirement.'
I'd be interested to know where to locate this information because, like you, I work in the public sector but thought early retirement from 55 is only available subject to certain criteria being met eg. ill health. Also the usual age is still 65 not 62- isn't it?
"Rather like our two policical parties??"
Three, I thought, or don't we count the one with the taste for blue?
Early retirement used to be the way of clearing the dead wood when there was a reorganisation in some part of the government service. These were instigated by the minister with the intention of streamlining the service etc. etc. and always ended up with more people employed than when the exercise started. It was by no means unknown for the individual to be reborn into another post remarkably quickly, or given a consultancy contract. I have also seen it used as an inducement to get someone to take on extra responsibilities to meet a temporary situation.
Yes Minister is sadly missed.
'Yes Minister is sadly missed.'
And Spitting Image, too. Politics has become all too serious and cynical these days.
"Politics has become all too serious"
I don't recall the Iron Lady being a stand up comic act exactly. Her colleagues found she had no sense of humour at all. Remember when the phrase "everybody needs a Willy" got a huge laugh at party conference and she had absolutely no idea why.
The present crop are perhaps beyond parody. Labour used to aim to overthrow capitalism now it boasts of saving it regardless of the expense. Michael Goves formula for sorting out education is set out at length in this week's Sunday Express and can only be described as so absurd no publisher would touch it as a work of fiction. Apparently there is a lack of mention of Henry VIII and Churchill in our schools which is a bit of an odd claim as my kids did the Tudors and the Second World War a number of times as they went through the system. Again if you told the proverbial anthropologist from Mars that a major political party thought that a knowledge of history consists of reciting king and PM lists they would think it too ridiculous for words.
I neglected to mention that Mr Gove MP is chiefly concerned at the lack of respect for authority figures on the part of the young. Thats a bit rich coming from a member of an institution that has lost any lingering respect the entire population may have had for it. Again you could not invent it as satire.
Is AL's replacement allowed to answer letters sent to the office or are they still going to end up unanswered?
Of course. Who are YOU to question the Town Hall?
Of course! Who are YOU to question the Town Hall??
Do you think he will go on to work in other areas ?
i.e a fire marshal or something still in politics ?
He has for for some time been in the East Dorset District Council, I believe in the Standards Committee.
I don't know if this is where he will migrate to. There, or some other council post.
It's really not our business.
'I don't know if this is where he will migrate to. There, or some other council post.
It's really not our business.'
Think you'll find you're wrong - any public sector employer has a duty to ensure value for money (strange as that may sound) and it is not unknown for there to be a limit placed on earnings for those discharged courtesy of early retirement packages.
Therefore it is every bit our business in that respect particularly given such an early departure from one's duties.
I heard a rumour that a six figure golden handshake is being paid.
£0000.01 ?
Hah!
I'll put you down for a fiver for his leaving prezzie.....
...and no jokes about "one way tickets out of town"!
Is the rumour that the new multimillion pound Town Hall to be built with SBV money will be named the 'Leeson Civic Centre'??
...true??
.. of course not..
Though there is talk about moving the Town Hall function elsewhere, to somewhere that is better suited for the job (including providing disabled access). But this would only be done on preparation of a proper business case that examines all the costs/benefits arising, and relates to all other options (such as relocation of the Tourist Office).
Several points -
The Town Hall is no longer adequate for that purpose. Among other issues, it is not accessible to everyone. A point which was acknowledge by one disabled gentleman who was pleased that he was able to attend last year's annual town hall meeting,held up at the Vista (which is accessible). Is it worth investing sums to improve the current TH, or is it better to move elsewhere and sell it for other use?
A TIC must be located where the tourists on foot are. That is, the town centre or the sea front. If the present building could be used to generate more income for the town, then perhaps a lease on a storefront would suffice for the TIC. Too bad the Museum doesn't have room for the TIC. Or does it?
It sounds as though a lot of the amenities are moving out to the area round Washpond Road/A351. Is this to become the new hub of Swanage? Could it rip part of the heart or life out of Swanage centre?
'I heard a rumour that a six figure golden handshake is being paid.'
If he gets paid that after only 10ish years think what I'll get after 30+ years!
Hmmmm - I don't think so.
It doesn't say where the decimal is in that six figures - now don't start on about your pension!!!
I will miss the Town Clerk. He has taken Swanage from a huge deficit (following the ill fated air display) to absolutely rolling in money! He has kept the mayors and councilors in check and he has followed all rules and procedures to the letter. You can't be everybody's mate and be a good town clerk. From time to time you have to stand up for your principles and ruffle a few feathers! His job has been hard and thankless but he has done everything expected of him and more. He faced down the riffraff up at the Muni caravan park and got us a fantastic deal with the new owners. We have been lucky to have somebody of his calibre and status come to Swanage. I know all town employees have found him a good employer. Every mayor has relied on his expert help and advice. Swanage will have a hard time without this Town Clerk!
I think the Council meeting room up at the Town Hall should be named the Leeson Room. And if we get a new Town Hall, up there too. Fitting tribute.
A job well done, Mr. Leeson! Enjoy your 'retirement'! I know you will keep busy! Three cheers from all of us in Swanage who are loyal to our town!!
'He faced down the riffraff up at the Muni caravan park and got us a fantastic deal with the new owners.'
Riffraff??? Who be that then?
"He has taken Swanage from a huge deficit (following the ill fated air display) "
What did the air display have to do with the town council? They built up debt because whenever they wanted to make a capital investment they borrowed the money. Unfortunately being a parish council they did not have the legal power to borrow, a nicety missed by the lenders and eventually picked up by the auditor.
STC was so far from funding the air show that they declined the request to increase the price of car parking on the day in their car parks to the level being charged in the organiser's temporary car parks, the income from the latter being how the thing was in fact supposed to be funded. Whatever made you think STC was funding it?
'Whatever made you think STC was funding it?'
The town was in a financial mess when AL took over. Just about the time of that air show fiasco. I never said he cured that loss - I said "He has taken Swanage from a huge deficit (following the ill fated air display)". I never said he discharged the air show debt. I said he fixed the town's finance after the air show debt. Now we don't have a deficit - we have a huge surplus. 7.25 million in the bank. No more putting up with that muni caravan site. He won; they lost; Swanage won. Now they're battling with the new owners. The new owners will win. We have our money. Swanage won!!
AL's done a first rate job in difficult times. End of story.
'Riffraff??? Who be that then?'
Look in the mirror, perhaps????
You said the debt followed the airshow. I did not want ill-informed readers to draw the conclusion that they were connected, an inference your wording pointed to. It is hard to read it in any other way than as a causal connection. You might as well have said he fixed the finances after a firm in south America went bust.
STC had no choice but to pay back its borrowing. They had absolutely no right to borrow the money in the first place. They seem rather fond of exceeding their powers as was demonstrated by the more recent falling out with the auditor over their power to run a caravan dealing business. Strangely no blame has ever been publicly attributed to their professional officers or advisors over either error.
Because of the agreement made by STC with the new Management. That company is looking to get £1.8 Million back over the next 5 years.How good is the deal? How are STC going to replace the £500k to £1.4 million they used to make profit from the site? They have to replace that for the next 105 years. It works out at over £1billion over the term of the lease.
I am curious. Is it the same people who think STC is incapable of organising a little light refreshment in a brewery and who also think it should still be running a multi million pound caravan sales operation? There is a posh word for folk who can entertain two contradicting ideas at the same time without noticing it, can anyone remember it?
It was making a good profit for the Town untill the Council thought they could do better and tried to rip the owners off too much. The owners knew they were being over charged but put up with it because it went to the Town and they come to Swanage for a rest and peace. But then the Council wanted to charge £25k each owner extra!!! Enough was enough
'That company is looking to get £1.8 Million back over the next 5 years.How good is the deal?'
This is interesting - could you kindly explain the background to this situation? Would I be correct to believe it states that the signed deal has had complications and that STC will have to reimburse part of the 7.25 million it got in the transaction?
'Strangely no blame has ever been publicly attributed to their professional officers or advisors over either error.'
If you have lived in Swanage as long as I have, you would not be surprised. The Council runs a closed shop and when it falls under scrutiny, it circles the wagons and protects itself. Have you not witnessed the numerous occasions when it has excluded the public from certain itens in the agenda?
As far as the District Auditor is concerned, these officers rarely impose strict or punitive sanctions against public bodies unless something egregious or illegal has occurred. Instead they tend to impose fines or corrective orders, or impose lesser penalties or admonishments that smooth over the issue at hand in a quiet and undemonstrative fashion. Once again, government has a tendency to try to protect itself from public scrutiny. I imagine government would state that the citizens have the ultimate sanction at their disposal: the ballot box. Perhaps the voters need to be made more aware than they are at present if things are 'wrong'? Would anyone have any suggestions on how this could be done?
'That company is looking to get £1.8 Million back over the next 5 years.How good is the deal?'
There is a clause in the sale agreement which say's that if Darwin cann't put up fees because of the Owners Assoc and any agreement between STC & BVO then Darwin can claim back from STC up to £1.8Mill over the next 5 years.I think the first year (this year)it is £600k The owners expect Darwin to stick with the licence agreed with STC last year. Darwin want to put up fees by 10% and market rates which is not in the Owners Licence.
If Darwins take STC to court it will cost the Town a fortune in legal fees. If STC settle it will cost £1.8 Mil
Oh, thanks for this!!
I would like to see that sales agreement! Can it be obtained by FOI?
Frankly, it should be available for all the town to see. It is not privileged or proprietary information, IMHO.
I wonder if the honourable moderator of this blog would object if it were posted on here (if legally obtained) as being 'in the public interest'?!!
Good luck, the caravan owners! After all I hear you have had to put up with, you deserve a break. It sounds as though you might win (and Darwin certainly won't lose, either way. Clever people!). The losers may well be Swanage and its people - pity us! Perhaps this possibility should be made public before the Town Clerk 'retires' so he can answer a few questions about it? If indeed our largest asset has been sold 'down the river', we should ask the whole Town Council to explain how this happened, and if this turns out to be true, then they consider doing 'the honourable thing'! And not hide behind the excuse of privileged information, or suspend discussing this issue from public participation, as is its want to do....
I wish we had a local news source that would be investigative. Come on, Gazette, here's your chance (the Echo seems to be a dead loss on Swanage affairs)! A chance to expose what may be a local scandal! 'BayViewGate'!!
When do the caravan owners hope to have their fees issue settled? It must have to be soon??? Do tell! This who business needs to be brought out from the darkness and into the daylight!!
Ask STC for a copy under FOI act and they have 30 days to send you a copy. I don't think the Postman would let you have a copy on here as it's pages long.
"If indeed our largest asset has been sold 'down the river', we should ask the whole Town Council to explain how this happened, and if this turns out to be true, then they consider doing 'the honourable thing'! "
I don't want to be rude but if you had kept abreast with council affairs on Swanageview you would know that they had no desire to sell but as the profits were coming from caravan sales and as this is not a risk free activity it is not something in which public money can be put at jeopardy. The powers of local authorities to indulge in commercial activities are very limited and the auditor eventually twigged this. There was much consultation with learned friends when this happened and, to the best of my knowledge. the council took it as far as a session with a judge in chambers. I was corrected in a previous thread on this subject for saying it went to court as it would appear STC were advised not to pursue the matter as they were likely to loose and took the decision to sell.
I thought the remarkable thing was that a council of tories such as ours did not privatise it years ago. Perhaps they are really closet socialists. Certainly the views on council house sales I have heard from some tory councilors were very old labour. What next if they had their way? The municipalisation of the means of production, distribution and communication. under democratic workers control? Socialism in one parish? Perhaps the new caring conservatism was quietly growing in the the womb of Swanage council. (apologies to Charlie Marx.) I had better go and lie down in a darkened room.
I was well aware that the Town HAD to sell the park when I posted at 6.16. What I questioned is: why they sold it this particular way? They had other options (I have read all options appraisals) but evidently went for complete disposal/cash up front, a path recommended by Jacobs & Reeves.
There was a legitimate offer from owners to create a hands-off business. This would have preserved the substantial cash flow into town coffers and would have assuaged the District Auditor's concerns. Another proposal was to create a community trust. These less draconian, more income producing ideas, and other cash offers I presume, were beaten by Darwin's cash offer. The acceptance of this offer is entirely the responsibility of the Mayor and Town Council. If, as I believe, in time it proves the town got a bad deal, then I would expect these people to accept the blame (just as they should accept credit if it works out for the best.) I have noticed absolutely no crowing from the Town Council over this - its been eerily quiet. Perhaps they hope it will be many years before the penny drops (and people see the deal was bad for the town)..... when memories fade.......
Only time will tell. IF STC has to refund up to 1.8 million pounds (almost 25% of the total) due to a rider that they fully knew existed at the time contracts were signed, then the final judgment of the Council's judgment in this matter will become evident much sooner than perhaps this Council wishes.
As for the remarks about Tories, etc, I would suggest that as long as SBV made a tidy profit, this Tory-led Council was quite happy. In fact, it's clear the Tory-led STC was running SBV as a quasi-privatised business anyway, by the very fact that the DA stopped it! So, with all due respect to the previous poster, I think the Council has been consistent (whether one agrees with it or not). It may be that the handling of the sale of SBV might turn out to be a pretty poor case of capitalistic endeavour on the Council's part.
'hands-off business'
Oops - I meant 'arm's-length'!
Going about 14 posts back to the one at 8.43pm.
"He (AL) has followed all rules and procedures to the letter."
ICO Case Ref: FS50218090.
Public Authority: Swanage Town Council.
"The Commissioner also identified a series of procedural breaches in relation to the way the Council dealt with the request."
Finding:
FOI 10 - Complaint Upheld
FOI 17 - Complaint Upheld
FOI 42 - Complaint Upheld
FOI 43 - Complaint Upheld.
http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50218090.pdf
As STC strives for best value, the loyal Swanage folk should be informed what this cost the public purse.
I do agree with the comment made at 8.43PM that from time to time you have to stand up for your principles and ruffle a few feathers, even if you are Muni caravan park riffraff.
I'd like to know the name of the town's legal representative. I want to ask the Town Council why it wasted our money in this fiasco.
The Town tend to use Jacobs and Reeves, who often use Vernon Mitchell.
Thanks for the FOI link.
http://www.ico.gov.uk/tools_and_resources/decision_notices/2010_01.aspx
JIC
http://tinyurl.com/yftxnkb
FS50218090
and read the pdf, for the background.
STC certainly squirmed! I wonder if they'll take up their right to appeal?
More importantly, is there any chance that they may learn that keeping secrets is silly!
He said, anonymously!
Now that the terms of reference are in the public domain could they be put on line. If the document is too large to go here there is no shortage of free web space, for example from your isp, and a link could be posted here.
The Council has decided that it is not economical to lodge an appeal and has agreed to comply with the directions.
Dear me, my paranoia is showing. STC is nearly as secretive as that organisation which gathers in those discrete but tatty premises in Marshall Row. A connection perhaps?
Re-direct your paranoia, at least that other secretive organisation have a Charitable arm, known as EstateAgentsRus, I believe!
So, they do at least do some good works!
'He said, anonymously!'
ISP noted and logged.
Hah!
Perhaps STC could be the subject of the next Dan Brown novel??
"The Council has decided that it is not economical to lodge an appeal and has agreed to comply with the directions."
Excuse me, but it wasn't exactly economical to delay producing this information under a legitimate FOI request, either.
It's easy wasting other peoples' money, especially for our Town Clerk, who has never lived or paid rates in Swanage. He lives in Corfe Mullin and commutes here in his council provided/subsidised car. I understand one of the criteria for his post was that the TC should live in or nearby Swanage. Somehow he got around that one.
He gets round anything it seems
..yet no one in Swanage seems to mind...
Only the 'riffraff' according to the poster at 8.43pm and they obviously don't count given their apparently low status!
Below are the unabridged Terms of Reference.
Swanage Town Council
Supplementary
Options Appraisal
Swanage Bay View Holiday Park
Terms of Reference
For Charles F Jones & Son
General
The Town Council having conducted its own financial appraisal of the long term strategic options in the operation of its Caravan Park is seeking an independent professional evaluation of a revised range of options. In determining the future management arrangements the Council is seeking independent advice in either leasing or disposal of its freehold interest in Swanage Bay View Holiday Park.
The Council undertakes to provide all information and assistance necessary to complete the Supplementary Options Appraisal, including details of expressions of interest obtained from a recently completed informal tender exercise.
The Consultants are directed to a range of factors to be taken into consideration, primarily the potential legal challenge by the Audit Commission as to the Council’s statutory powers in conducting caravan sales, which resulted in the Town Council resolving at its meeting held 30th May 2008 not to pursue further the management option but to explore in greater detail the ‘lease’ and ‘sell’ options.
Specific requirements
To undertake a critical overview of the Options Appraisal dated 17th December 2007 (as adopted 14th January 2008), identifying and providing consideration to any factors arising therefrom, including identifying any other potential options deemed appropriate.
To re-appraise the valuations provided by Charles F Jones & Son (as at December 2007) in light of market trends and current economic factors.
To consider the development potential of the Site and to provide an alternative valuation in respect of disposal of the site with a change of use.
To produce an analytical Supplementary Options Appraisal Report, compiled in an evidentiary format, to include a recommended preferred option.
Report
An assessment of the freehold value of the Park.
An assessment of the leasehold rental value of the Park if granting a full repairing lease protected by the Landlord & Tenant Act, based on varying terms of tenure.
Timescale
The Final Report is required to enable the Council to meet the deadline as outlined by the District Auditor, as set out below:-
12 noon on Monday, 30th June 2008.
Note – It is acknowledged that due to your existing business commitments you are unable to meet the required deadline. Due to the non-availability of key Town Council personnel during weeks commencing 7th & 14th July, it is further acknowledged that the Option Appraisal be completed on before Thursday,
31st July 2008. It is critical that this timescale is met.
Prepared by
Alan Leeson MBA
Can someone explain what all the fuss was about and what significance we can read into this document.
MBA from some spurious online diploma mill, methinks??
Had to get one because he had no qualifications when he was hired.
So WHEN does he go??
I can't wait.
21st March I think, But I have heard he's on "gardening Leave". I believe he's just clearing everything up.
'Gardening leave' within LA's is the generic term used when the paid leave of an employee is in the interests of the authority pending investigations.
Surely not!
Outside LA's gardening leave means tidy up your desk and go home. Don't take on anything new.
It is also in the Sale agreement that STC is liable to pay Darwin up to £50k for legal fees to take on the Owners. Not sure what this will do to the precept next year.
I hope the Owners have a 50k fighting fund.
I see the Honourable Town Clerk's name is still on agenda of future TC meetings at STC.
Wonder if he turns up, or sends Martin along to warm his seat for him?
Ah ha...I see an employee's grievence is being aired at the next STC meeting....seems somebody from the Bay View disaster is claiming grievance over loss of income and pension. Wonder which former employee (of a cast of literally dozens) that might be?
Has he gone yet?
If not, why not?
Last day tomorrow (Friday)
Ah, the same days officers of Bay View Owners, and Darwin, and legal representatives, meet to discuss the site fee objection.
How ironic!
He's gone.
Good luck, Martin!
Post a Comment