THE 2009 REVIEW OF
THE CHEDWORTH SOCIETY
SUMMARY
The Chedworth Society has developed over the past 40 years on an informal basis during a period of rapid change. In these circumstances, it was timely to carry out a full review of its principles and output, with the aim of determining how best the Society should continue to support the Parish. In executing this task, the Committee acted as an autonomous Review Team to maintain a distinct division between routine tasks and completion of the Review. As a precursor, the Society was bench-marked against 2 similar organisations in the District, an exercise that confirmed it was well founded and robust to scrutiny.
The Review Team determined that, rather than focus singularly upon the Conservation Area, the Society’s remit should again cover the whole Parish. The Constitution should be amended to include 2 additional Objects to encourage the Society to take a more forward-looking stance. Following removal of the Society from the Charity Commission’s Register in consequence of a very long-standing oversight to submit annual returns, the Society should gain re-instatement as soon as possible. In addition, the Society had a requirement for Public Liability Insurance cover.
The outcome to the 2008 Chedworth Parish Plan had the potential for overlap between the resultant Action Teams and specific interests of the Society. The Committee should therefore seek to establish and maintain close links with those implementing the Village Plan’s findings to harmonise the output of both groupings whenever possible. Similarly, given that the Parish Council shares the same ethos of voluntary support to the local Community, the Society should seek to explore the means of drawing its relationship with the Council even closer together than hitherto. While its procedures had been well founded over many years, the Society should take all steps to ensure it acted with complete impartiality and transparency. To this end, lists of applications commented upon by the Planning sub-Committee should be placed upon the Society’s web-page. In addition, the Society should usefully determine whether or not to have a set of procedures that were readily available for reference and standardisation when any specific need arose.
Since its formation, protection and conservation of Chedworth’s environment had been a central tenet on the Society, amid a sharper and ever-increasing public focus on this aspect of present-day life. Accordingly, the Committee should consider the need for having a distinct Environment focus, either within its ranks or wider membership. In seeking to streamline responsibility for dealing with membership matters, it would help to have responsibility fall to a new appointment of ‘Treasurer & Membership Secretary’. Moreover, as the Society had no form of library or central archive, it would also be sensible for the Committee to establish a suitable and permanent reference base.
Of the 2 ongoing projects, the Waterwheel in Upper Chedworth should be afforded first priority, ahead of the newly identified project for a Parish Information Point. To meet the Society’s ongoing commitments, the Committee should make full effort to seek the involvement of members to the greatest extent possible. Moreover, to aid the Society dealing with Charitable and Public trusts, a member of the Committee should have a specific responsibility for promoting the Society to these Bodies. In addition, the Society should also promote its cause visually through use of a logo. In the near-term, the Society should perhaps become involved in producing a Village Design Statement. Longer term, the Society should seek to identify Community projects or needs based upon 2 themes: ‘history’ and ‘involvement’.
THE 2009 REVIEW OF
THE CHEDWORTH SOCIETY
CONTENTS
DEFINITION Para 6
REVIEW METHODOLOGY
Order of Work Para 7
Benchmarking Para 8
FINDINGS OF REVIEW
Objects of the Society Para 9 – Para 11
Charitable Status Para 12
Public Liability Para 13
2008 Chedworth Parish Plan Para 14 - 16
Involvement with Parish Council Para 17 – Para 18
Procedures Para 19 - Para 21
Committee Structure and Arrangements Para 22 - Para 24
Projects Para 25 - Para 26
Involvement of Members Para 27
Finance Para 28 - Para 30
Logo Para 31
THE FUTURE
Context Para 32
ANNEXES
A. Background to the Chedworth Society
B. Benchmark Organisations
C. Constitution of the Chedworth Society
D. Chedworth Amenity Organisations and Functional Groups
E. Village Design Statements
THE 2009 REVIEW OF
THE CHEDWORTH SOCIETY
1. Chedworth is a village steeped in history and with a charm that has evolved over many centuries. From Neolithic times onwards, each period of habitation has left its mark. As a self-contained and artisan community up until the turn of the last century, Chedworth sat comfortably within a fold on the Cotswolds escarpment, a feature that served to emphasis a sense of rural self-sufficiency. From the 1920s onwards, dramatic demographic and social changes affecting all of society bore no less upon Chedworth and its previously long-held way of life. Inevitably, as farming methods changed and agriculture lost pre-eminence as a local employer, the structure of the village population altered, such that by 1960s the nature of the community that had endured for a millennium gave way to a much more diversified population, both in terms of skills and employment base.
2. As this pace of change accelerated, community members became aware that the pressures and demands of modern living could result in a gradual but certain loss of Chedworth’s natural, architectural and social charms. This awareness subsequently led to the identification of a need for a collective village forum - other than those societies and organisations with specific interests - to act as a focus for all Village residents. Specifically charged with protecting the visual and social appeal of Chedworth, the concerned grouping determined that such a forum should: contribute to Local Government by offering a deep-seated sense of civic awareness; maintain a constant vigilance to protect the appearance and charm of the Village, promote a concern for the appearance of public and private land; and encourage pride in the history and character of Chedworth through lectures and meetings. Thus, the Chedworth Society (CS) was formed on 08 July 1969.
3. Yet the very nature of change that brought about the formation of the CS has not only continued to pervade the community but also increased significantly in tempo. That said, all change should not be regarded as negative. Many developments have benefited a wide spectrum of the Village, and the Society has been involved in much of this process. In addition, National and Local Government have become more concerned and alert to planning and environmental issues than hitherto, with measures such as the 1977 designation of the Chedworth Conservation Area (CCA) very much reflecting the Society’s founding principles. More recent initiatives, including the 2008 Chedworth Parish Plan, the emergence of new amenity groups, and progressive improvements in State provisions, have each contributed to the character of the Village and the lot of its inhabitants.
4. What has become unclear, however, is the extent to which the combined weight of these changes and developments has impacted upon the Society. In early 2009, the Executive Committee (EC) of the Society decided to address this issue by carrying out a full review of the Society’s principles and output. By seeking to ensure that its focus remained relevant to the Village’s present and future needs, the CS would be set fair in moving forward.
5. The aim of this Review is to determine how best the CS should continue to support the Parish of Chedworth
DEFINITION
6. The Parish of Chedworth is taken to include Lower, Middle and Upper Chedworth, Chedworth Laines, Pinkwell, the Hemplands, Fields Road, Foss Cross, Fossebridge (west of the A429) and rural areas including the Chedworth Roman Villa.
REVIEW METHODOLOGY
Order of Work
7. During preliminary discussions, the EC agreed to act as a Review Team (RT) to ensure that the review process did not become confused with routine Committee work. Following an initial scoping assessment, the RT held 4 meetings over the period March – July 2009. Following a first draft in early September, work progressed against a target completion date of 30 October 2009. Initially, the RT spoke to numerous members of the Society to solicit their views, which were subsequently used to help develop a framework for further work. The RT was especially minded to avoid falling into the trap of believing that everything was in good order, and to be critical across a full spectrum.
Benchmarking
8. For information, a background to the CS is set out at Annex A. From its beginnings, the Society has evolved in a somewhat ad hoc fashion, with changes taking place without external monitor or input. Concerned to gain a wider perspective, the RT contacted 2 similar organisations within the District - The Painswick & District Conservation Society, and the South Cerney Trust - to carry out a bench-marking exercise. The process revealed a very high degree of commonality between all 3 organisations, in terms of structure, objectives and methodologies, as indicted at Annex B Notably, respective working practices all follow comparable lines and are underpinned by the same ethos of public benefit. A list of main conclusions from this comparison is also at Annex B. These cast the CS in a very favourable light, and served to confirm that the Society was well founded and robust to scrutiny.
FINDINGS OF REVIEW
Objects of the Society
9. Within the Constitution (copy at Annex C), the charitable Objects provide the foundations for the Society’s work. The First Object delineates the scope of the Society’s commitment to the ‘Parish of Chedworth’, but other – more recent – documents limit the Society’s activities to the CCA. The RT concluded that these later stipulations were inherently divisive and inappropriate. The Society should therefore re-affirm that its area of interest and activity remains within the Parish, as defined at Para 6.
10. Following on, introduction of the ‘Benefice of Chedworth and District’, which includes ‘Yanworth with Stowell’ and ‘Coln Rogers and Coln St.Denys’, does not lie within the Society’s present remit. A number of members reside in these outlying settlements, which
gain no benefit from the work of the Society. That said, these villages are communities in their own right and each has a strong spirit of independence. The RT therefore sought the views of resident members to determine whether or not they felt their settlements might wish to be included within the work of the Society. Feedback highlighted that, while appreciative of such an offer, these members wished to retain the status quo. The RT therefore decided that the concept of expanding the remit of the Society to the Benefice should be set aside, but membership should continue to be extended to those in outlying parishes and elsewhere.
11. The 1969 Constitution has served the Society well over the ensuing 40 years. The Object’s key tenets - to preserve, enhance and improve - are deliberately general and, arguably, reactive to external inputs rather that proactive to concerns, concepts, and ideas of Society members. To provide greater scope for the Society to take a more forward looking stance, the RT decided that, in accordance with Article 12, the following Objects should be added to the Constitution:
a. ‘To seek to influence the process of change within the Parish for the betterment of the settlement and its community’.
b. ‘To help manage the process of change, including lead or partnership involvement with other concerned bodies’.
Charitable Status
12. Perhaps more than any other sector of society, charities can command public trust. The core characteristic of charitable work is public benefit, and this lay at the heart of the Society’s original registration with the Charity Commission (CC) in 1969. The RT was therefore surprised to determine that a long-standing oversight (from the EC’s earliest days) to submit annual returns had led to removal of the Society from the CC’s Register. In addressing this situation, the RT did see fit to weigh the annual task of meeting the Commission’s requirements against the benefits of re-instatement. On balance, the RT quickly came down in favour of seeking re-instatement as soon as possible.
Public Liability
13. Earlier work in 2008 had raised concerns about the Society having no Public liability insurance to cover activities and assets for which it could be held responsible. The Review process served to strengthen the immediacy of this need, such that cover was subsequently effected in July 2009. However, the premium represents a large proportion of the Society’s annual subscriptions. As such, the RT concluded that the EC should therefore monitor (on an annual basis) the need for continuing this cover.
2008 Chedworth Parish Plan
14. The 2008 Chedworth Parish Plan, sponsored by the Chedworth Parish Council (PC), had identified issues of importance to individuals and determined how the community felt the Village should develop. The Plan’s findings were divided into 5 sub-sections, as summarised at Table 1 of Annex D. Each of these covers a wide range of social and amenity issues, with several having a direct bearing on the Society’s Objects. (For information, Annex D Table 2
sets out a list (not necessarily exhaustive) of all other functional groups within Chedworth). Concerned to avoid duplication of effort with the related Action Groups, the EC had earlier established links to harmonise its work with the Parish Plan’s proposals. Specifically, the Society agreed to provide a Village Archivist against Serial 3-6 (Conserve Social History of Parish), and for Ser 4-1 (Improve Navigation around Village) offered to provide a ‘Parish Information Point’, as outlined at Para 26 below.
15. Of particular note, several of the references in the Environmental Action Plan have a direct bearing the Society, including Restore Dry stone walls (Ser 1-1), Reduce Litter (Ser 1-2), Enhance Rights of Way (Ser 1-5), Retain/maintain Locally Distinctive Landscape and Heritage Features (Ser 1-6) and Encourage Volunteer Time and Expertise (Ser 1-8). Arguably, on the basis of bringing to bear the greatest weight of effort, there could be benefits in having both the CS and the Environmental Action Group involved with these issues. However, the Village does not have boundless levels of volunteer support, and such an approach could run the risk of duplication of effort, or conflicting interests, or both.
16. In addressing the 2008 Parish Plan, the key aspect for the CS will be clear and timely dialogue with Action Group opposite numbers. The RT therefore determined that the Society should seek to establish and maintain close links with those implementing the findings of the Village Plan where potential overlap may exist.
Involvement with Parish Council
17. The PC carries formal and statutory authority for a range of issues at local level, and is therefore able to seek to bring the related regulatory State provisions to bear, as and when necessary. As its web-page highlights, ‘the Parish Council plays an important role as the grass roots level of Local Government, directly representing and promoting the interests of the community. Councillors also [keep] everyone aware of local needs and concerns and [report] back on District, County and regional changes’. However, such authority does carry stringencies, such as an inability to carry out unfettered fund raising (once the Council has set the annual Parish precept), or otherwise constraints obligated through procedural requirements, local government delineations and the like. As such, the PC cannot range at will and does not have a volunteer membership to call upon for support. In these circumstances, the Society in the past has helped to support the PC, for example, by contributing to the launch costs of the 2008 Parish Plan and by taking part in the preparation of the CCA Statement.
18. What draws the PC and the Society into the same arena is a shared sense of voluntary support to the local community, and what will firmly underpin this common value is continuing clear dialogue. To this end, the recent re-establishment of a Society representative at monthly meetings of the Council has helped to open up a more routine flow of information. The RT therefore determined that the Society should therefore build upon this recent innovation, by continuing to explore the means and methods by which it could develop even closer links with the PC than hitherto.
Procedures
19. The Society’s procedures are well grounded through practical application over many years, although some recent events have served to identify that these procedures would
benefit from closer scrutiny. Specifically, the Society does not make public its comments on planning, on the basis that these are accessible through the CDC Planning Department. However, this approach does not sit comfortably with latest Government directives regarding Freedom of Information. More locally, the community might take this approach by the Society as a means of avoiding the public gaze by hiding behind a screen of bureaucracy. To ensure the Society’s work remains quite transparent, the RT therefore decided that Society’s web page should list those applications that the Planning Sub-Committee had commented upon.
20. From time to time, the Society is contacted by members with concerns that, de facto, fall within its charitable objects and more likely than not involve a third party within the community. In addressing such matters, proprietary requires the CS not to assume that such concerns are necessarily well founded or otherwise supported by Statute or Government regulation. Such aspects could only be determined through rigorous and thorough investigation. Lacking any authority other than the mandate of its membership and (hopefully re-instated) charitable status, the Society must therefore remain alert to the boundaries within which it could - and should - function. These considerations raise a vital need for the EC to handle matters brought to its attention with considerable care. If the EC erroneously deals with any particular matter, at best, the Society could run the risk of appearing unfairly biased; while at worst the EC could become the target of a legal dispute.
21. To address these concerns, it might be useful to have a standard set of procedures to which the Society could refer when dealing with matters brought to its attention. Such a methodology would assist the EC to avoid any spur of the moment reaction to formal and informal inputs, and would demonstrate to all parties that the Society acted with an even hand. The RT therefore determined that the EC should progress the efficacy of such an arrangement and achieve a final outcome by end-July 2010.
Committee Structure and Arrangements
22. Several years ago, the then EC decided to form the Chedworth Oil Club (CHOC) with the aim of obtaining the best price for Club members. Equally, the CHOC also introduced the practice to reduce the consequent number of delivery vehicles visiting the village on a weekly basis, which would also beneficially reduce the wear and tear on road surfaces and verges and contribute to a reduction of the community’s carbon footprint. Following on, the Society’s focus has increasingly been drawn towards Environmental aspects by suggestions and proposals from its membership, as these continue to become very much part of modern day living. From its founding, environmental matters have lain very close to the heart of the Society through the charitable Objects, and are now firmly embedded within this ever increasing pace of change. To ensure the Society remains abreast of such developments, the RT therefore decided that the EC should consider the need for a distinct Environment focus following further research into this area
23. At the moment, responsibility for dealing with membership matters is shared between the Secretary and the Treasurer. In seeking to streamline this responsibility, it would be helpful to bring responsibility for all aspects under a single and dedicated appointment. Given that the Treasurer has recently developed a newly computerised database and also remains central to the collection and accounting of annual subscriptions, the RT determined that the role of this appointment should be expanded to that of ‘Treasurer & Membership Secretary’.
24. Diversity of work requires the Society to seek the advice and support of a very wide range of organisations. In the recent past, for example, the EC has called upon the Countryside Commission, Gloucestershire Constabulary, and British Society of Dowsers to help progress matters of moment. Usually, discussions have been conducted on an ad hoc basis, preceded by a significant amount of research. However, the Society has no form of library or central reference in which such distilled knowledge could be catalogued to aid future work or repeat need. To this end, the RT determined that the EC should establish a suitable reference base, perhaps overseen by the Secretary, and develop a simple methodology to encourage its use.
Projects
25. At present, the Society is involved in 2 main projects. The first is the long running and difficult task involving the Waterwheel in Upper Chedworth. Originally restored by the CS in 1995 at a cost of some £5500, the functionality of the wheel has, at best, been problematic. There is a very strong will in the Village to see the wheel again restored, but achieving this aspiration would involve much work, support, and significantly more funding than the 1995 total. For these reasons the project has lain somewhat fallow for several years, while remaining a regular item on the Society’s routine agendas. As such, this Project has almost run its course and time is now of the essence. Moreover, further inactivity runs the risk of the wider community regarding the waterwheel as a metaphor for indecision or something worse on the part of the Society. Following completion of this Review, the waterwheel project should therefore be afforded first priority as a project, and any assessment should include the option of removal of the wheel without replacement.
26. Stemming from the 2008 Village Plan, the second project is to provide a ‘Parish Information Point’. Such a facility could offer a form of schematic map and include local features, footpaths and the like. The concept has developed slowly under the shadow of carrying out this Review, but will require added momentum at the turn of the year to ensure a timely and successful outcome. The RT determined that this Project should therefore become a second project priority during 2010.
Involvement of Members
27. Thus far, this Review has focussed primarily on the work and output of the Society through the medium of the EC. To be effective fully within the Parish, the Society needs and requires the support of a strong and involved membership. Some of this involvement should currently takes a passive form; this continue unchanged, in that a strong membership supportive of the actions of the Society provides the necessary mandate to the EC. However, the Society will only be able to achieve full and enduring success if members are keen to take an active role, as and when necessary, to implement the work stemming from the Society’s charitable Objects. The RT therefore decided that the EC should review the manner in which it seeks the support of members, to ensure the Society maintains an output commensurate with its Objects and aspirations. To assist in this process, the EC should seek to identify a bank of potential volunteers. Such individuals could have expressed a general commitment to the assist the Society or have particular skills. Otherwise, members could have shown as specific interest in matters such as environment, projects, IT developments (e.g., improved village broadband), organising talks and presentations, and liaison with members/public/functional organisations.
Finance
28. As a (re-registered) charity founded on a non-profit basis, the purpose of any fundraising by the Society is to provide a sensible level of working capital and maintain a small reserve to cover ad-hoc small grants/donations and other contingencies. Annual expenditure currently runs at some £2200, with an ongoing surplus averaging about £6000. Since 1995, the Society has funded a total of £10,155 for good causes, including the waterwheel project (£5786), Village School (£2000), Village Hall (£1214) Church (£461) and other smaller projects (£694).
29. Traditionally, income for the Society has come from membership subscriptions, surpluses on events, interest on cash balances, and a relatively lesser amount from donations. During 2009, in particular, interest income has declined sharply, while the Annual Dinner (usually a good source of income) has had to be been priced to break even to reflect realistic expectations. Otherwise, trips and lectures have continued to make some contribution, although in the current economic climate there is perhaps little scope for significant rises. That said, some talks in the past have been particularly successful.
30. The Society’s strength comes from its extensive membership. It is therefore important that the annual subscription is never a barrier to joining or continuing membership. However, this subscription has remained set at its present level for many years, and a small increase is now justified, particularly in light of the need for the Society to take out Public liability insurance. Some individual projects have the capacity to contribute towards their funding. For example, the map project will look at grant opportunities as well as the potential for advertising by local businesses; and the waterwheel project (if continued) could be supported by partners who could derive a tangible benefit. More widely, there is a wide range of local and National Charitable and Public trusts that offer grants and donations to much of what the Society could become involved with in the future. But this does come at the price of having full familiarity and understanding of the requirements and processes by which such Agencies function. To this end, a member of the EC should have a specific responsibility for promoting the funding needs of the Society to these Bodies.
Logo
31. A logo is the shortest and most precise form to express the appeal of an organisation. The emblem also serves to bring together all individuals under a recognisable umbrella and help tighten the bonds that link its membership into a cohesive form. As such, the RT decided that the CS would be well served by such an emblem, and should seek to incorporate an appropriate depiction as soon as practicable.
THE FUTURE
Context
32. The short period of 40 years that the CS has existed can only be regarded as a snapshot in time, when set against almost a 1000 years of development witnessed by this rural settlement now known as Chedworth. To some, such a short involvement could be seen as verging on the immaterial. However, this view would be both trite and unreasonable,
once the ever-increasing pace of change since WWII is taken into account. More than any other period in its history, Chedworth needs the unique appreciation and understanding of its inhabitants as to what is best for the future. The charitable tenets that provide the raison d’être for the Society’s involvement carry no authority to stop development or change from happening. However, the CS can continue to influence for the good how these factors impact upon this most appealing valley settlement. In this regard, the role of the Society is as firmly embedded in the future as it has been in the past. But in looking forward, both near- and longer-term, what form should this involvement take?
33. Hitherto, a greater part of the Society’s work has centred upon how development in Chedworth should be carried out, so that it is in harmony with its setting. Some 10 years ago, the CS worked in close collaboration with the CDC and the Chedworth PC to prepare the CCA Statement. This important document provides guidance on how the preservation or enhancement of the character and appearance of the CCA can be achieved. More latterly, the CDC in 2007 adopted a Local Development Framework (LDF), which includes a statement of community involvement within a new planning system.
34. Complementing these documents, Village Design Statements (VDS) are accepted by planning authorities as advisory ‘Supplementary Planning Guidance’. VDS are produced by local communities and represent the views of their settlements as a whole. Further information about VDS is contained at Annex E, including their purpose and objectives. Near-term, the CS would both meet its charitable Objects and help further define a future context for its functions by becoming involved in producing a VDS for Chedworth. The RT therefore decided that the EC should progress the VDS concept with the Chedworth PC.
35. Attempting to define a longer-term vision on which the Society should base its work is not easy. In essence, however, development of this Review has helped provide some clarity by identifying 2 recurring themes, namely History and Involvement.
36. Seeking to bring the History of Chedworth into even sharper focus could only add lustre to an already glowing inheritance. Such a move on the part of the CS could perhaps focus upon continuing to maintain or enhance that which Village forbears have provided: including, the ancient network of footpaths and dry stone walls, natural verges, harmony of building materials, absence of light pollution, together with potential sites of archaeological exploration. All of these (and more) provide a continuum from the past, to what the Village is today and should be in the future.
37. In terms of Involvement, the CS has an excellent long-term track record covering a wide-ranging spectrum - from repairs to the Village Hall gates, grants to the new-build School Hall, through to collaboration in the CCA Statement. Equally important, as concerns have increased about protection of the environment, the Society has responded by word and deed. Formation of the offspring and exemplar CHOC and continuing work with the Countryside Commission and County authorities should be regarded as modern day building blocks, which have been placed upon the Society’s environmental foundations. Projecting further forward, the Society, for example, could continue to promote carbon reduction through a future ‘Towards Carbon Neutrality’ campaign for the Village.
38. Overall, the difficulty with managing change over the longer-term is identifying a starting point. The challenge to the Society will be to maintain its Involvement in this process, such as to make a meaningful and continuing contribution.
39. In completing this Review, the Executive Committee (EC) acted independently as a Review Team (RT), to ensure the Society’s routine work remained separated from the Review process. Against the background to the formation of the Society (see Annex A), the RT bench-marked (Annex B) the Society’s function against 2 similar organisations in the District, an exercise that confirmed that the Society was well founded and robust to Scrutiny.
40. The Constitution (Annex C) of the Society delineates the Society’s Objects to within the Parish of Chedworth, although more recent working practice has focussed upon only the Chedworth Conservation Area. On the other hand, some members come more widely from the Benefice of Chedworth and District, although they gain no benefit from the Society’s work. In addressing these 2 aspects, the area of interest and activity of the Society should remain within the Parish of Chedworth, but the concept of expanding the Society’s remit to the Benefice of Chedworth and District should be set aside. Moreover, while the original Charitable Objects have served the Society well, the addition of a further 2 Objects would help the Society to take a more forward-looking stance.
41. Although founded as a Charity, failure by the Society to submit the required returns has led to its removal from the Charity Commission’s Register. Work is now in hand to gain re-registration as soon as possible. In addition, the Society should take out Public Liability Insurance, although the need for this requirement should be reviewed annually.
42. The 2008 Chedworth Parish Plan had identified issues of importance to the Community, as identified at Table 1 of Annex D. These issues are grouped into 5 sub-Sections (each headed by a related Action Group), which to greater and lesser extents do have some overlap with the Objects and specific interests of the Society. To help avoid the risks of duplication of effort, conflicting interests (or both), the Society should seek to establish and maintain close links with those implementing the Village Plan’s findings, where potential overlap may exist. Similarly, the Society and the Parish Council share the same sense of voluntary support to the local Community. To develop this liaison further, the Society should explore the means and methods of drawing this relationship even closer together.
43. While its procedures have been well founded over many years, the Society should take all steps to ensure it acts – and is seen to act - with complete impartiality and transparency. To this end, lists of applications commented upon by the Society’s Planning sub-Committee should be placed upon the Society’s web-page. Similarly, the Society should usefully determine whether or not to have a standard set of procedures that were readily available when any specific need arose. Given that environmental concerns had laid hear the heart of the Society for some 40 years, the EC should consider the need for establishing a distinct Environment focus. In seeking to streamline responsibility for dealing with membership matters, it would also be helpful to have responsibility for this task falling to a new EC appointment of ‘Treasurer & Membership Secretary’. As the Society had no form of
library or central archive, it would also be sensible for the EC to establish a suitable and permanent reference base.
44. The Society has 2 ongoing projects – the Waterwheel in Upper Chedworth, and a new task to perhaps provide a Parish Information Point (a map-based board containing various local details). Given the relative needs, the Waterwheel should be afforded first priority. To meet the Society’s ongoing commitments, the EC should make full effort to seek the involvement of members to the greatest extent possible.. The Society’s annual expenditure currently runs at some £2200, with an ongoing surplus averaging about £6000. Since 1995, the Society has funded a total of £10,655 for good causes. To aid the Society dealing with Charitable and Public trusts, a member of the EC should have a specific responsibility for promoting the Society to these Bodies. In addition, the Society should also promote its cause visually through use of a logo.
45. The pace of continuing change that Chedworth has experience – especially since the end of WWII – leaves the Village vulnerable to losing a disproportionate amount of its character and charm. A fundamental Object of the Society is to address this threat, but anticipating such change and taking appropriate action is difficult. In the near-term, the Society may perhaps be able to contribute to the Community by becoming involved in producing a Village Design Statement for Chedworth, following the principles identified at Annex E. In the longer term, the Society should remain fully involved in any projects or needs based upon 2 themes that have remained uppermost as this Review progressed, namely, ‘History’ and ‘Involvement’.
46. It is recommended that the 2009/10 AGM of the Chedworth Society adopts the findings of this Review.
31 October 2009
Annexes
A. Background to the Chedworth Society
B. Benchmark Organisations
C. Constitution of the Chedworth Society
D. Chedworth Amenity Organisations and Functional Groups
E. Village Design Statements
ANNEX A TO
1. Founded as a charitable organisation, the CS was registered (No 259277) with the Charity Commission on 02 September 1969. The original (and still extant) Constitution determined that the Society should function against a total of 6 Charitable Objects and be overseen by an EC of 10 officers. Of particular note, the Constitution determined that the primary Object of the Society should seek to Preserve and enhance the character of the parish of Chedworth and its surrounding countryside and to improve in every way possible its appearance and amenities.
2. During this early formative period, the Society’s activities focussed primarily upon: making constructive comments on all planning applications; supporting the Parish Council in its work to protect and improve the village amenities; making known the rights of way, and help, when no-one else could, to maintain and mark them; and encouraging pride in the history and character of the village through lectures and meetings and eventually publish a village history. Interestingly, the Society at this time was also concerned about septic tank outflows leeching through the shallow topsoil to the ‘marshy area in the valley bottom’. To avoid this situation becoming a nuisance, it was determined that ‘the danger must be continually brought to the attention of planners who do not always include drainage in the plans submitted’.
3. Extracts from reports of the time by the Council for the Preservation of Rural England highlight, inter alia, that
a. The open character of the village is most unusual for the Cotswolds and is worth preserving.
b. The village must become much more aware of its charm and take much more care of its outward appearance.
4. As the Society entered the 1990s and with some 170/180 members, the work of commenting upon planning applications was by now channelled through a Planning sub-committee. Notably, by now such comments progressively had become almost limited to those within the CCA. Lectures, presentations, and outings to places of interest were a regular feature each year, and a Projects sub-committee was also formed to deal with matters of particular concern. Specifically, this work included rebuilding the waterwheel in Upper Chedworth, researching the history of the Village, and helping to make known and preserve rights of way – in some cases by marking and maintaining them. Sometime later, local interest in wells and springs (both long-lost and extant) kindled the start of a ‘Survey of Wells in Chedworth’, and a desire to re-establish a flow of water through the ‘Watersplash’ adjacent to the Church gates.
5. As the Society proceeded beyond the Millennium, both its membership and functionality were well founded, although its Constitution, founding Objects, and general routine remained much the same as over the previous 35 years. During this intervening period, other developments and changes had also taken place across a wide spectrum of life
in the Community, a considerable majority of which could be regarded as having a material effect (directly or otherwise) upon the Society’s founding charges. A fascinating glimpse of this evolutional process can be witnessed through the 1961 Declaration of Trust for the Chedworth Village Hall. In its Second Schedule, the Declaration lists the representative organisations on the Hall Committee, included in which are: the Football Club, Girl Guides, Social Club, Congregational Church, Boy Scouts, Vestey Cup Games, Roman Catholic Church, and the Sports Club.
9. None of these organisations now exist in the Village. Notwithstanding these losses, the process of change has seen the emergence of other groups that meet a current need within the community, as illustrated at Annex D. Such developments, understandably, were not linked directly to the work of the CS. This is not to say that the Society remained dormant. The relatively recent formation of the Chedworth Oil Club (CHOC) as an offshoot to the Society’s main activities is regarded by external agencies as an exemplar development in terms of both community involvement and environmental concern.
ANNEX B TO
2009 CHEDWORTH SOCIETY REVIEW
|
|
Chedworth Society
|
Painswick & District Conservation Society
|
South Cerney Trust |
|||||
|
Contacts |
David Musgrave Chairman 01285 720198 davidmusgrave@btinternet.com |
Maurice Maggs 01452 814092 |
Peter Jay Chairman 01285 860 641
|
|||||
|
Date of Society formation |
8th July 1969 |
Reconstituted in 1980s |
1963 |
|||||
|
Legal entity |
Registered Charity No 259277 |
Considered and rejected forming a charity because of Trustee responsibilities |
· not a charity and do not have a formal constitution. · non-profit making
|
|||||
|
Organisation |
Committee (7/10) + planning sub-committee Committee meetings every … |
Structure TBC. Four committee meetings per year and other meetings for particular local issues |
Executive Committee (10) + Lifetime VP |
|||||
|
Constitution |
As adopted by Charity Commission - 8th July 1969 |
Self styled |
No formal constitution, see “Flyer”.
|
|||||
|
Membership Area |
Parish of Chedworth |
Loosely-defined Painswick and environs including Sheepscombe, Edge, Slad |
· Parish of South Cerney and Cerney Wick · Not within AONB |
|||||
|
Objectives |
· To preserve and enhance the character of the parish of Chedworth and its surrounding countryside and to improve in every way possible its appearance and amenities · To secure the support of, and cooperate with, bodies local and national, whose functions or interests affect, or are compatible with, the objectives of the Society. · To stimulate public consciousness and appreciation of the beauty, history, and character of Chedworth and its surroundings. · To encourage the preservation, development, and improvement of features of general public amenity or historic interest. · To encourage a strong public opinion in support of the above objectives. · To pursue these ends by means of |
The Painswick & District Conservation Society was reconstituted in the 1980s, but our objective remains the conservation and protection of our environment, particularly from unwanted development. Thus last year Stroud District Council received 123 planning applications from the Painswick area and our committee monitored all these and acted on any that were potentially detrimental. We believe an interested and concerned membership is important and persuasive, bringing benefits to the community through publicity and representation. Meanwhile the Society’s recent contributions to the Parish include the successful Millennium Video, grants toward new Kissing Gates and part funding of the Queen’s Jubilee lantern.
|
· We are neither reactionary nor revolutionary just caring about our environment and those who live here. · to stimulate public interest in, and care for, the history and character of the parish of South Cerney and Cerney Wick. · seeks to promote improvement but to protect the environment so that the villages are pleasant and interesting places for all who live in them.
|
|||||
|
|
Chedworth Society
|
Painswick & District Conservation Society
|
South Cerney Trust |
|||||
|
|
meetings, exhibitions, lectures, and the promotion of schemes of a charitable nature. |
outside the Town Hall |
|
|||||
|
Conservation work |
Requests for advice to Government Depts Waterwheel Comment on planning applications |
|
Complaints to CDC GCC and MP. Grants for local projects. Oversee of footpaths etc |
|||||
|
Dependencies / links with other groups |
None |
· Act independently. · No links to educational establishments. |
· Independent from PC. · At least one of our executive members is a Parish Councillor - it’s me at present. We tend to work together having the same interests and doubling any effect on CDC (sadly little at present) |
|||||
|
Membership roll, age range, … |
170 members |
80 households |
· 250 households as life members · No idea of average age as membership is per household but most of the attendees at our twice yearly lectures make me look youthful! (I am 65!!) But we do have an increasing number of the younger families joining (South Cerney is not an ageing village - we have a higher than county average of young people)
|
|||||
|
Communicating with members |
Email, phone, newsletter, AGM, meetings, web page |
|
|
|||||
|
AGM |
AGM |
AGM + talk (25 attendees) |
AGM normally held in early December. This and the lecture meetings usually take place in the Village Hall. |
|||||
|
Publications |
Newsletter every 6 months |
Newsletter every 6 months posted or delivered by hand (2 recent issues requested) |
Twice yearly newsletter - copies supplied |
|||||
|
|
Hill & Valley monthly update |
Inserts into The Painswick Beacon (http://www.painswickbeacon.org.uk/) monthly magazine which lists all clubs and societies. The print run of 1500 copies is delivered free to every household in Painswick, to subscribers in the neighbouring villages of Edge, Sheepscombe and Slad, and from pick-up points in other villages. There are also
|
We advertise in our Village Monthly Cerney |
|||||
|
|
Chedworth Society
|
Painswick & District Conservation Society
|
South Cerney Trust |
|||||
|
|
|
around 90 postal subscribers from elsewhere in UK and around the world: from Bangkok, Warsaw and Montreal. |
|
|||||
|
|
Shared web site www.chedworth.org.uk/chedworth-society/index.php
|
Shared web site TBC |
Shared web site http://www.southcerney.org.uk/directory.htm
|
|||||
|
|
Contributed towards publication of CDC 2000 Chedworth Conservation Area Statement |
|
We were one of the main supporters of the Village Appraisal and the Village Plan |
|||||
|
|
|
|
We have a number of publications including a local history, guide to the church and a book of old photographs.
|
|||||
|
Non-member enquiries |
|
Take action and hope they will join subsequently |
No official response but if it makes sense we will |
|||||
|
Decision process for enquiries |
|
By Committee (frequent dialogue by email) |
Members channel their observations, complaints etc through committee members. |
|||||
|
Subscriptions |
£2 individual per annum |
£5 individual per annum £7 household per annum |
£15 individual lifetime £20 household lifetime |
|||||
|
Projects |
Water Wheel Wells Report Water Splash
|
· Millennium video · grants toward new Kissing Gates · part funding of the Queen’s Jubilee lantern outside the Town Hall. |
|
|||||
|
Activities
|
· Comment on planning applications. · Outings to places of interest · Talks for members and friends · Annual dinner · AGM · Village Archivist (new) · Investigate matters of member concerns |
· Comment on planning applications. · No reporting on local issues – these are covered by the newspaper & The Painswick Beacon magazine · Prepared Conservation statement for one of the c 50 local areas on behalf of Stroud DC · Chase utility companies to tidy up after works · Pursue improvement to dilapidated areas
|
· An elected Committee meets regularly to review planning applications which are relevant to the parish and any issues raised by members of the Trust or Committee, and to decide on any action deemed appropriate to protect the interests of the Trust. The Committee also arranges meetings for members. · We work closely with the Parish Council on planning matters. |
|||||
|
|
Chedworth Society
|
Painswick & District Conservation Society
|
South Cerney Trust |
|||||
|
Events + Talks during 2009 |
|
|
There are normally two public lecture meetings during the year on topics of interest to members, with particular emphasis on subjects related to the parish, its history and environment. Topics of recent lectures include:- · Edward Jenner, The Jurassic Water Park, Wild flowers of the area,Bats,29th Regiment RLC, South Cerney History,Saxons of the Upper Thames Valley, Aerial Archaeology, · The murder of Edward II and just last week · a presentation by two of our members who had researched two artifacts one a wooden cross in the church the other a soldier's dog tag. Both were traced to Canadian soldiers in WW1 and have resulted in one name being added to the war memorial. 6/5/09: South Cerney Trust Spring Lecture - A members evening with a Canadian Connection. |
|||||
|
Donations to individuals and other groups |
yes |
|
We have sponsored the Cotswold Water Park to produce a set of circular walks. We are reasonably well off financially and make grants to local organisations especially at times of crises such as repairs resulting from vandalism eg the war memorial and grave stones in the church. We also offer book bursaries to 18+ year olds going up to university.
|
|||||
|
|
Chedworth Society
|
Painswick & District Conservation Society
|
South Cerney Trust |
|||||
|
Related other groups (overlap / adjacency) |
· Parish Council · Environmental Action Group · Village Hall committee ·
Village
Trust |
The Painswick Beacon Conservation Group was set up in 1992, and followed on from a public meeting arranged by English Nature. The aim was to form a team of people willing to help restore the unimproved grassland on the Common. This grassland has never been fertilised or treated with herbicides or pesticides, and as a result it has become a refuge for many endangered plants, insects and birds. Our activities include: scrub clearing on the first Sunday of each winter month, guided walks in June to see the orchids, and recording wildlife. We have recently received A Peoples and Places Award from the British Trust of Nature Conservation for £7,400, and another from the Cotswold AONB Partnership of £5,300. These funds will be used to encourage new members to join us and to train them in the practical skills of conservation. |
The Cutts Charity, A South Cerney Charity offering financial help to parishioners in need.
|
|||||
|
Income |
Small profit from events |
|
|
The above Tables highlight that:
a. The foundations of the Chedworth Society are very well established through its formal Constitution and Charitable status.
b. The structures of the 3 organisations are very similar, in terms of periodicity of meetings, membership numbers, and nature of catchments areas.
c. While the communities of Painswick and South Cerney are relatively large compared with Chedworth, membership levels are similar
d. On balance, the Chedworth Society carries out a wider range of activities, including the organisation of external visits to places of interest
e. The working practices of all three organisations follow comparable lines and, overall, each Society/Trust is underpinned by the same ethos of public benefit.
f. The main objectives of each organisation are equally similar, focussing upon conservation, protection of environment, promotion of local history, contribution to local improvements, project work, and community activities.
g. Communication by all 3 organisations is by bi-annual newsletters, shared websites and Parish magazines.
h. At £2 per individual/annum, the Chedworth Society charges the lowest subscriptions.
ANNEX C TO
2009 CHEDWORTH SOCIETY REVIEW
CHEDWORTH SOCIETY CONSTITUTION
1 NAME
The name of the Society shall be the Chedworth Society.
2. OBJECTS
The objects of the Society shall be to promote and encourage the following objects by charitable means but not otherwise:
a. To preserve and enhance the character of the parish of Chedworth and its surrounding countryside and to improve in every way possible its appearance and amenities
b. To secure the support of and co-operate with bodies’ local and national whose functions or interests affect or are compatible with the objects of the Society
c. To stimulate public consciousness and appreciation of the beauty, history and character of Chedworth and its surroundings
d. To encourage the preservation, development and improvement of features of general public amenity or historic interest
e. To encourage a strong public opinion in support of the above objects
f. To pursue these ends by means of meetings, exhibitions, lectures, and the promotion of schemes of a charitable nature
3. MEMBERSHIP
Membership shall be open to all who are interested in the aims of the society. Membership shall lapse if the subscription is unpaid six months after it is due.
4. SUBSCRIPTIONS
The subscription shall be at a rate recommended by the Executive Committee and adopted at a General Meeting.
5. MEETINGS
An Annual General Meeting shall be held not later that the end of January each year to receive the Executive Committee's report and audited accounts (the financial year running from 1st January to 31st December) and to elect Officers and Members of the Committee. The Committee shall decide when ordinary meetings of the Society shall be held and shall give at least fourteen days' notice of such meetings to all members Special General Meetings of the Society shall be held at the request of ten or more members. Ten members personally present shall constitute a quorum for a meeting of the Society.
6. OFFICERS
Nominations for the election of officers shall be made at or before the annual General Meeting.
Such nominations shall be supported by a seconder and the consent of the proposed nominee must first have been obtained. The election of officers shall be completed prior to the election of further Committee members. The officers of the Society shall consist of
Chairman Vice-Chairman Honorary Secretary Honorary Treasurer
All of whom shall relinquish their office every year and shall be eligible for re-election at the Annual General Meeting. A President and Vice-President may also be elected at a General Meeting of the Society, for periods to be decided at such a meeting.
7. COMMITTEE
a. The Committee shall consist of six members (other than officers) who shall serve a period of three years. Thereafter two members shall retire each year and shall not seek re-election for one year. The Committee shall have power to co-opt further members. The President and Vice-President may attend meetings of the Executive Committee but may not vote at such meetings.
b. Nominations for election to the Executive Committee shall be made at or before the Annual General Meeting. Such nominations must be supported by a seconder and the consent of the proposed nominee must first have been obtained.
If the nominations exceed the number of vacancies, a ballot shall take place.
c. In the event of an office becoming vacant the Executive Committee shall have power to fill the vacancy.
d. The Executive Committee shall be responsible for running the affairs of the Society, and may take decisions on its behalf. A quorum for meetings of the Executive Committee shall consist of five members.
8. APPEALS
The Executive Committee shall have power to make appeals, solicit donations and canvass monies for carrying out the objects of the Society.
9. EXPENSES OF ADMINISTRATION
The Executive Committee shall out of the monies received by the Society pay all proper expenses of administration and management of the Society and shall use the residue of such monies as it thinks fit for or towards the objects of the Society.
10. INVESTMENT
All monies at any time belonging to the Society and not required for immediate application for its objects shall be invested by the Executive Committee upon such investments securities or property as it may think fit, but so that monies subject to or representing property subject to the jurisdiction of the Charity Commissioners or of the Minister of Education shall only be invested in such securities as may for the time being be prescribed by law.
11. BORROWING
The Executive Committee may borrow for the objects of the Society such monies at such rate of interest and in such manner as it may think fit.
12. AMENDMENTS
The Constitution may be amended by a two-thirds majority of members present at an Annual or Special general Meeting, provided that ten days' notice of the proposed amendment has been sent to all members, and provided that nothing herein contained shall authorise any amendment permitting the expenditure of funds of the Society on any object which is not a charitable object.
13. WINDING UP
In the event of the winding-up of the Society the available funds of the Society shall be transferred to such one or more charitable bodies having objects similar or reasonably similar to those herein before declared as may be chosen by the Executive Committee and approved by the Charity Commissioners for England and Wales.
ANNEX D TO
2009 CHEDWORTH SOCIETY REVIEW
CHEDWORTH AMENITY ORGANISATIONS AND FUNCTIONAL GROUPS
1. The Tables below set out the social initiatives and amenity organisations/functional groups that are currently in existence within Chedworth.
Ser No(a)
|
Name(b) |
Function/Commitment(c) |
|
1 |
Chedworth Environment Action Plan |
|
|
1-1 |
|
Restore dry stone walls |
|
1-2 |
|
Reduce litter |
|
1-3 |
|
Encourage renewable energy |
|
1-4 |
|
Improve recycling facilities |
|
1-5 |
|
Enhance rights of way |
|
1-6 |
|
Retain/maintain locally distinctive landscape and heritage features |
|
1-7 |
|
Reduce noise pollution from Rendcomb airfield |
|
1-8 |
|
Encourage volunteer time and expertise |
|
1-9
|
|
Encourage local biodiversity |
|
2 |
Housing and Development Action Plan
|
|
|
2-1 |
|
Investigate way of providing low cost housing |
|
2-2 |
|
Investigate carrying out village design statement |
|
2-3
|
|
Investigate provision of business units |
|
3 |
Social Leisure and Services Action Plan
|
|
|
3-1 |
|
Increase play and social opportunities for young people in parish |
|
3-2 |
|
Set up youth council |
|
3-3 |
|
Extend Children’s play area |
|
3-4 |
|
Improve social and leisure facilities for seniors |
|
3-5 |
|
More practical help for seniors |
|
3-6 |
|
Conserve social history of parish |
|
3-7 |
|
Reduce crime/insecurity |
|
3-8 |
|
Erect additional notice boards |
Ser No(a)
|
Name(b) |
Function/Commitment(c) |
|
4 |
Traffic and Transport Action Plan
|
|
|
4-1 |
|
Improve navigation around village |
|
4-2 |
|
Improve road safety around School |
|
4-3 |
|
Reduce Speeds |
|
4-4 |
|
Improve safety for cyclists |
|
4-5 |
|
Lack of useful public transport |
|
5 |
Enterprise and Employment Action Plan
|
|
|
5-1 |
|
Set up business Club |
|
5-2 |
|
Website for Business Club |
|
5-3 |
|
Village Business Hub |
|
5-4 |
|
Develop business opportunities in Chedworth |
|
5-5 |
|
Produce Village directory of goods/services |
|
5-6
|
|
Lack of alternative burial/memorial facility |
|
6 |
Hill and Valley Magasine
|
|
Ser No(a)
|
Name(b) |
Comment(c) |
|
1 |
Badminton Club |
|
|
2 |
Bell Ringing Group |
|
|
3 |
Chedworth Cricket club |
|
|
4 |
Chedworth Drama Society |
|
|
5 |
Chedworth Horticultural Society |
|
|
6 |
Chedworth Oil Club |
|
|
7 |
Chedworth Parish Council |
|
|
8 |
Chedworth Pre-School |
|
|
9 |
Chedworth Silver Band |
|
|
10 |
Chedworth Singers |
|
|
11 |
Chedworth Society |
|
|
12 |
Cheery Club |
|
|
13 |
Hill& Valley Lawn Tennis Club |
|
|
14 |
Parochial Church Council |
|
|
15 |
Royal British Legion |
|
|
16 |
Rural Cinema |
|
|
17 |
St Andrew’s School |
Including Board of Governors and PTA |
|
18 |
Table Tennis Club |
|
|
19 |
Village Agent |
|
|
20 |
Village Hall Committee |
|
|
21 |
Women’s Institute |
|
|
22 |
6 to 8 Club |
|
|
|
|
|
ANNEX E TO
1. As a founding principal, the Countryside Commission believes that the rich and varied character of rural settlements forms an important part of the beauty and distinctiveness of the English countryside. Some 10 years ago, the Commission felt this character was under increasing threat from standardization and poor design; in response, it developed the concept of Village Design Statement(s) (VDS) to enable local communities to participate in, and influence, the way planning systems operate locally.
2. VDS offer a framework for engaging local people in constructive debate about how to help ensure new development in their area fits into its surroundings and is in keeping with local character. VDS are about the visual quality and physical appearance of rural settlements, described in terms of size, shape, scale and materials. Their purpose is to manage change. Such statements are not about whether development should take place – this is the task of a local plan or local development framework. Rather the role of VDS is about how development should be carried out. To this end, VDS describe the distinctive character of rural settlements and surrounding countryside; draw up design principles based on the local character; and work in partnership with other National and Local Government directives to influence future policies.
3. The main objectives of a VDS are to:
a. Draw upon physical character of the village through eyes, ears and experience of local people.
b. Set out clear and simple guidance for the design of all development in a village, based on its character.
c. Influence the operation of the statutory planning system to make a positive contribution to the locality’s setting and environment.
d. Provide a perspective for the future.
4. If properly undertaken, the benefits of a community completing a VDS should:
a. Raise the planning profile of the Settlement within the local planning authority and others
b. Provide a pool of data not available elsewhere
c. Establish new relationships between the community itself and the wider local statutory authorities
d. Foster understanding
e. Share good practice
f. Encourage partnership working & support