New Portobello High School - PPAG/"Save Porty Park"

[portygeoff]

Seems quite a few public school bods are deeply concerned about the safety of PHS pupils. We have recently had representations from FP's of George Watson's and Stewarts Melville. And the planning portal has an essay from a former Herioter, now PE teacher, who appears heartbroken by the loss of the park where his lifelong friendships were formed. Seems all his mates survived playing on a park adjacent to the Golf Course.
Amazing, isn't it?

Some parents of Holyrood kids are also amongst the most vociferous about the threat of the Milton Road to our pupils. Which is touching, considering their own kids have to negotiate the very same road on an almost daily basis to get to school. Do they care for the safety of our kids more than they do their own, I'm welling up here.

One of the leading lights in stopping the new school is so concerned about the education of Porty High kids that they send there own to a private school. Another spends their time slagging of Port High as dreadful school, despite its actual very good record. PPAG are not concerned about the education of our community children, they are not really concerned about the golf course which will still be there and probably used more. They just want to keep it as an underused asset for a few dog walkers and little clique.

[seanie]

The most frustrating thing is that they've left it till now. The park was chosen as the preferred site in 2006. If PPAG are arguing that the school can't go there because of the Common Good issue, they could've have challenged that decision at any point since then. They've had the best part of 5 years to do so but have waited until just before contracts were to be signed for construction to start. And even after all that time they still haven't actually raised the money to see a court action through. They've managed to cause this delay without any actual certainty that a legal action will proceed.

[Charlie Cavaye]

One of the leading lights in stopping the new school is so concerned about the education of Porty High kids that they send there own to a private school.

Has anyone had the time - or inclination - to try and do a small statistical analysis on how many of the objectors actually have nay need of a new school? By that I mean, how many do/would/could send their kids there. It should be possible to extrapolate the status of those we can identify, to give a reasonable guide to the group as a whole. In my experience (and I only know of a handful of the objectors) very few have or would send their kids to PHS; that's if they even have kids. My point being that they can only see the one side of the argument, whereas those of us who have kids can see both (I don't want to lose open space but the education of the next generation takes precedence in my book) and make a reasoned decision based on that.

[Porty]

T. They've managed to cause this delay without any actual certainty that a legal action will proceed.

Is it definite that there will be a delay. Surely the full Council will have to discuss the matter? Having spent a substantial amount of council tax payers money obtainng legal opinion, surely they have to go with that and not the actions of a few selfish punters?

[seanie]

I would think so. Court proceedings have been initiated so the Council have to go through the process anyway and there's no critical reason to proceed at risk, even if that risk is very small.

A new school is a 'necessary'. A new school by August 2013 instead of January 2014 is a 'nice to have'.

[Porty]

I guess that makes total sense.

[rmolehusband]

Save the Park 5K Running Race * POSTPONED *

Looks like it's back, next Thursday, the 22nd, with a new name - the 'Space to Breathe 5k Race'. They say there are up to 200 places, and they're charging 5 quid a head entry.

Things is, for an event of that size, I'd have thought they'd require permission from the council to use the park. Given they're raising funds to take the council to court it's very generous of the council to have said yes.

(http://eventsedinburgh.org.uk/Parks-Greenspace.html)

[seanie]

It was put on the PPAG Facebook site yesterday but the post seems to have gone.

[rmolehusband]

It was put on the PPAG Facebook site yesterday but the post seems to have gone.

Thanks, I thought I'd imagined that.

If I was cynical I'd think that they didn't want this event publicly linked with PPAG. It's nominally being organised by the 'Sri Chinmoy Athletic Club' which is probably just to save PPAG the 50 quid Scottish Athletics affiliation they need to run a race, but again might be to hide the PPAG link from those outside the community.

I doesn't appear on the council's calendar, so I still doubt they sought permission. Still, it's their park isn't it, why would they need to ask the council? Maybe they're staying up the 'private' end'.

[Porty]

I know SA got a few email complaints about the race. There's mention on the PHS facebook site.

SA wrote back and said "they" had got a permit for the race and therefore SA were happy to support it. I don't know who "they" have said they are? If Sheila Coventry (who is the advertised contact) had used an affiliation with SA to avoid the £50 and had not said it was PPAG, that would fit with removing the Ad from the PPAG facebook site.

It is a f****** sad state of affairs when a campaign group are so corrupt they cannot advertise fundraising events on facebook.

[seanie]

'Secret' use of proceeds from 5K run

Ros Sutherland, chair of PPAG, said: "The race is being run as a profile-raising event and if you look at the flyer that's been circulated it says there is a cost to enter the race, which is £5 per person, and there are prizes.

"There is a cost involved with hosting a race and the entry fee is to cover those costs.

"At this point I couldn't comment (on whether the entry fee will go towards the legal costs] because I don't know how many people have entered.

"I haven't totalled the cost in terms of our expenditure so I'm not in a position to comment on that because I have no idea how many people have entered or what is our outlay."

They're hoping for 200 entrants at £5 a pop.

Does it actually cost £1,000 to host a 5k race for 200 people?

[Porty]

I very much doubt it costs more than £100.

The park run was part of a grand fundraising scheme, plotted by the PPAG fundraising committee as evidenced by the minutes of their meeting on 28/06 this year. And I quote'

"9) Richard had investigated possible venues for a dinner dance. If we booked Portobello town Hall 9th & 10th Sept. Holding the dinner dance for 200 at £50 per head the potential profit could be £5K plus any profit on drinks & auction.

The thought was if we could have some sort of event e.g. a park run or golf tournament we could have the award ceremony followed by a ceillidh with raffle after it, The thought will the 2 event idea is that it is only 20% more effort to have a 2 day than a 1 day.

Ros will speak to the golfers to see if an event is possible, she will also look into the possibility of getting Portobello Ceilidh band for the event. Sheila will speak to her brother re options for this date. Everyone to think of potential ideas for auction, Scott has sport connection so will think of a few possible. Action: RS, SC, SM ALL

Once again her pants are on fire in a public place. And I notice she has nothingto say about PPAG duping St James Church into having a fundraising coffee morning.

[rmolehusband]

'Secret' use of proceeds from 5K run

Absolutely brilliant! Seldom, if ever, have I enjoyed an article in the EEN so much. Well done!!

[Porty]

I've had this for a couple of months. I waited to see if PPAG tried to book the Town Hall under a different guise or perhaps organise some other sort of fundraising event on a pretext. Can't see much point in keeping it on the QT now:

PPAG Fund Raising - Minutes of meeting 28/06/2011

Attendees: Jennifer Peters, Richard Forbes, Moyra Statham, Sheila Coventry, Ian Ross, Sheila Fletcher, Agnes Cowan, Scot Macpherson, Fiona Huffer, Ros Sutherland, Raye Manshouri.Lacking our usual degree of structure without Diana, but a good meeting nevertheless, hope I’ve captured everything, please let me know if I haven’t!


Agreed Actions

1)Diana’s 5-10 key points flier was well received and the majority were split between Sheila C & Agnes for distribution round Portobello/Christians and Park Avenue area respectively. Agnes had produced something similar with envelopes and they will also be used around the Park Avenue area Action: Distribution of leaflets by SC & AC (Diana if more of these are produced can we add payee name for cheques and also paypal details)

2) Facebook site is up and running, if you haven’t registered a ‘like’ please do so & encourage your friends to do the same. Action: ALL

3) We discussed additions to the facebook site. There are ‘golf strike’ issues which Scott is aware of so Scott will give consideration to appropriate details to be added to the site
Action: SM to email to JP who will arrange it’s addition to facebook & send on to Alison Connelly to update the website

4) Moyra, Ros, Steven Hawkins, Mehdi & Jennifer to be added as facebook administrators, able to update site Action: RF
5) Portobello golf club is holding an open competition 17th – 22nd (The Harry Lauder Trophy)This is a great opportunity to warn the golfers that this may be its last year. It was agreed that some A4 posters (the one that refers to the golf course will be printed on one side and Diana’s key points leaflet will be printed on the reverse. These will be handed out at the tournament. Moyra will call Scott Forest the organiser to discuss this. Richard will email the posters to John Huffer, he will print and Fiona will pass to Moyra and Sheila ahead of the event Action: RF, MS SF & FH

6) Still on the poster front. Everyone was impressed by Richard & Karen’s posters. Richard will email the posters to John Huffer, who will immediately print and laminate 12 A3 BEEP BEEP posters which Jennifer will put up along the road ahead of the school holidays for maximum impact. The rest will be printed by John and passed to Jennifer to laminate and tie up strategically around the park Action: RF, FH & JP

7) Sheila suggested a long banner to go along the railings for as long as it lasts. She knows someone who can produce it. Everyone agreed it was worth a go Action: SC
8) There is still a strong feeling that we need to have a more thorough target of the immediate area around the park to achieve max donation from those immediately affected. Ros & Ian will consider the best way of chunking this up and the best way of approaching it Action: RS & IR

9) Richard had investigated possible venues for a dinner dance. If we booked Portobello town Hall 9th & 10th Sept. Holding the dinner dance for 200 at £50 per head the potential profit could be £5K plus any profit on drinks & auction. The thought was if we could have some sort of event e.g. a park run or golf tournament we could have the award ceremony followed by a ceillidh with raffle after it, The thought will the 2 event idea is that it is only 20% more effort to have a 2 day than a 1 day. Ros will speak to the golfers to see if an event is possible, she will also look into the possibility of getting Portobello Ceilidh band for the event. Sheila will speak to her brother re options for this date. Everyone to think of potential ideas for auction, Scott has sport connection so will think of a few possible. Action: RS, SC, SM ALL

10) Richard is 90% of the way through setting up a paypal link to the facebook site he just needed signatory details which I believe Ros gave him at the meeting .
Action: RF

11) We had a chat about the ‘Rich List letter’ that Diana had prepared. Everyone liked it. There were only 2 suggested changes. Jennifer to pass to Diana who can update and then distribute. Everyone is to get their thinking caps on as to who would be good. We should all use the same letter with personalisation as appropriate. Ros has a list of people and will let us know if this is to be split up for us to send out. If you plan to send some out let Ros know first as she will keep tabs on how many have been sent & ensure no duplication. Action : JP DC & RS

12) Could we consider some promotion at the next organic market. Diana are you involved in this? Could you consider? Action: DC

13) Re the tablecloth idea for the day on the prom. Richard has iron on transfers. Will pass to Jennifer along with email logo to print on to them for distribution to anyone who is making a tablecloth ACTION: RF, JP

Successes!!!!
Marjorie & Sheila F’s dinner party went very well and raised over £300. Feel free to follow their lead
Sheila C and her friends handed leaflets round the local primary schools to spread the word and there is support out there.
Richard set up the facebook site (hopefully now with paypal)
Next meeting to be confirmed.
Thanks for your support!

[Pal of Porty]

Here is part of Ros's statement

Ros Sutherland, chair of PPAG, said: ......."At this point I couldn't comment (on whether the entry fee will go towards the legal costs] because I don't know how many people have entered. "I haven't totalled the cost in terms of our expenditure so I'm not in a position to comment on that because I have no idea how many people have entered or what is our outlay."

What on earth does it matter if only 1 person or 500 poeple enter - the event is either a fund raiser or a profile event. Seems like she claims it it only a fund raiser if it makes a profit or a profile event if it does not!

White woman speak with forked tongue.

[rmolehusband]

It was put on the PPAG Facebook site yesterday but the post seems to have gone.

Thanks, I thought I'd imagined that.

No, wait, it's back on the FB page. No mention of whether or not it's a fund-raiser or an awareness raising exercise though.

[seanie]

Not surprised it's back.

Difficult to square the 'awareness-raising event' line with the absence of publicity on their web-site, blog and facebook page.

[seanie]

And look, the entry fee necessary to cover costs has now magically disappeared.

They're now running a fund-losing event.

[Bob Jefferson]

I'm not a runner but the prospect of running 5k round a muddy park in the dark while dodging the dog poo and paying £5 for the privilege doesn't do much for me.

[Mark Cameron]

Perhaps those in favour of the new school could participate in the run now there appears to be no entry fee. Might be a little embarrassing to PPAG if there is overwhelming support for the development at their awareness event.

[seanie]

But they've ditched the entry fee and are still offering prizes. You might only be running against the PPAG fundraising committee.

You'd be in with a shout.

[Mark Cameron]

You've obviously never witnessed me running! However there'd be a satisfaction in seeing prizes go to a school supporter.

[Porty]

I'm baffled. As Seanie says; a fund raiser has now become a fund loser. And no way PPAG are holding an event to raise awareness of the park. They are forever telling us the place is "much loved by everyone". How can people love something they are unaware of.

I'm also mindful of the recent statement by "Save Porty Park". You know the on about how the council couldn't hold a piss up in a beer manufacturing facility? What about the ten strong PPAG fundraising committee who can't stage a fundraiser in a "well used "park.

[seanie]

And as Ghost says;

And challenging PPAG to "come clean" and make accounts publically available? Why would they want to do that? It is irrelevant - why exactly do you feel you have a right to know?

When you're trying to raise upwards of £80,000, why would anyone expect you to account for that in an open and transparent way?

It's only £80,000.

[Porty]

Publishing accounts would maybe help differentiate PPAG from say; Nigerian con men who seek to extract money from poorly informed individuals, on a fraudulent basis.

Its a big maybe.

[Bob Jefferson]

With 665 votes cast so far on the EN poll, the PPAG vote stands at just 17%. No doubt they will claim that it has been rigged and will continue with their ridiculous claim that they represent the significant majority of the community.

More concerning is the fact that PPAG supporters have been abusing the Comment section attached to the poll. In particular, Sean and I have been subjected to a tirade of insults and jibes, stories have been completely fabricated and someone has made abusive posts pretending to be Sean. Personally, I couldn't care less what people say about me. I've come to realise over the years that if you are prepared to stick your head over the parapet then you can expect to be shot at. But it does demonstrate the mentality of some PPAG supporters. I do not intend to complain to the EN about these posts. I don't want them removed. I want people to see for themselves what we are up against.

[Bob Jefferson]

Breaking news:

The Council is set to award the construction contract for the new Portobello High School to Balfour Beatty Construction. Councillors will be asked to approve the proposed appointment at the Council meeting on 22 September.

Balfour Beatty has agreed to delay the signing of the contract for the works with the Council until the outcome of a legal case over the siting of the new school on Portobello Park. The Council will defend the legal action as its own legal advice from a QC states that it is possible to build the much-needed replacement school in the park.

City Education Leader Cllr Marilyne MacLaren said:

“Following a competitive tendering process we are pleased to announce that Balfour Beatty is our preferred choice to be awarded the contract for the new Portobello High School. We greatly appreciate that they are willing to delay the contract signing until after the legal action is resolved as this will keep additional costs to a minimum for the council.

"Balfour Beatty are one of Scotland’s leading construction companies and we are confident, that with them on board, we will give the Portobello school community a new school that they can be proud of.

"It's hugely disappointing that the start of the work may be delayed but, by agreeing to some preparatory works going ahead before the contract signing, we hope to keep any delays to a minimum."


Note to editors:

1. At the Council meeting on 22 September, Councillors will be asked to:

* approve the appointment of Balfour Beatty Construction Scottish & Southern Limited as the Principal Construction Contractor the new school, subject to the approval of the contract being take to Council at a future date.

* approve preparatory works up to a maximum cost of £200,000 be progressed to mitigate the risk of delay to the construction programme.

2. A local action group (Portobello Park Action Group) have raised a legal action in the Court of Session to review the decision to build the school on Portobello Park. The Council will vigorously defend this action as its own legal advice from a QC is that it is possible for the school to be built there.

3. Initial consultation on the site for a replacement school took place in 2006 at the conclusion of which Council approved that the new Portobello High School would be built on Portobello Park.

4. The decision to go ahead with the project was taken in December 2008. Planning permission was granted earlier this year following an extensive pre-planning consultation programme

[Porty]

On balance, this is very good news.

Sorry to hear about the abuse of Bob and Sean, PPAG are a small bunch of desperadoes.

[Porty]

With 665 votes cast so far on the EN poll, the PPAG vote stands at just 17%. No doubt they will claim that it has been rigged and will continue with their ridiculous claim that they represent the significant majority of the community.
.

In a way it was rigged, they split our vote in two!!

[wangi]

Subject: Maureen Child: Report & Updates August 2011

Dear All

There is a Report to full Council on Thursday 22 September about the New Portobello High School. Click on Agenda Item 8.1 at the link below to get a read of the paper which will be considered by Councillors at that meeting.

http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/meetings/me ... gh_council

As you may well know by now, the contract to build the school cannot be signed off yet, though the tender process is complete. Portobello Park Action Group (PPAG) who oppose the use of this site for the new school, are seeking to test the matter in the Court of Session and have lodged a Petition for Judicial Review which is due to be heard on Friday 9 December. PPAG claim that the Common Good designation of the Park precludes its use for building the new school and associated playing fields. The Council is sure that its legal advice from their Counsel is sound and that the school can be built. Until the Court has deliberated, the project is stalled. The new school was on track to open ahead of schedule in August 2013. That expected opening date has now been put back again to the original opening date of January 2014.

There have been letters and further coverage in the Evening News about this yesterday and the News is conducting one of it's on-line interactive surveys asking the question:

"Do you agree with the actions of the Portobello Park Action Group or is it in the wrong?"

You can email your views on this to letters_en@edinburghnews.com or write to Evening News, 108 Holyrood Road, Edinburgh EH8 8AS

I also attach a poster advertising consultation sessions for people to give their views on how some £150,000 of project money should be spent on open space when (?) the new school is built on Portobello Park. ...

Paper attached.

[Porty]

All sounds reasonable. Reads like the project may be delivered at £5M less than budget, is my understanding correct?

[seanie]

[Charlie]

Not commented on the school yet, but feels like things are not harmonious in Portobello. Thinking ahead - will need to be some kind of community bridge building exercise when the school gets built (not talking about the Forth crossing, which may finish before the school).

Perhaps some joint statement from both sides. We the undersigned:

1) lament deeply the loss of any green space in the local area, but alas the park is the ideal place for a new school.
2) understand that while the loss of the park is deeply upsetting, it was in fact a giant dog toilet
3) will undertake a group hug and celebrate the new facility
4) will prepare, together, for Portobello Against Any Other (Frikin) Park Becoming (more of) a Dog Toilet

Too early?

[Porty]

Charlie that's funny!!

Up until now theres been no split Community here in Portobello, it is a myth.

There has been a long running conflict between two opposing groups. And some on both sides really don't like how some of the opposition have gone about their business. However, the Community is largely unaware of what its been like in the clinches.

The conflict has involved less than a couple of dozen people, one side has been totally anonymous since 2007. How could so few split a community that is overwhelming disinterested in the subject of conflict. Widespread apathy has been a frustration for both sides when trying to galvanise support for their particular cause.

As for reconcilliation and peace? I am supremely confident the PPAG legal challenge will fall, if not at the first hurdle, very shortly thereafter. The Council have said they will try and enter into dialogue with the group and/or bring the case forward to secure an early decision. We will see how that goes.

For my part, as one of the leading protagonists for a school in the park. I'd happily do the 5k run, holding hands, with a few of my opposite number, were they gracious enough to cease the petition. Not because I fear the outcome, I'm sure the School is getting built. It would be great if PPAG bowed out and let the kids start their year in a new school AND give the other Wave 3 schools the best chance of benifitting from the £5M saving.

I have no mandate to speak for my fellow combatants but I hope they feel the same way.

[Mark Cameron]

Like