Can you sit on more than one Council then? She's currently listed as KPC which makes no sense to me.
Are we saying that she's moving to Banbury or is this just a political move to have more sway on more councils for FoSB?
I do not live there so don’t fully know the answer, but my understanding is for the most part there is support for ‘independent’ representatives in that area as they have a little freedom from overall party policies and are able to respond on case-by-case basis on the merits of each different situation. This positions them to better represent the voices of those who elect them, rather than forcing them to amplify party messages or party agendas. I know for certain that they listen to constituents and try to be responsive and supportive of local feeling, over and above anything else. This is also why the Banbury seats are so concerning - you elect people who don’t live in the area and who bring set agendas, you don’t not get local voices represented honestly. As for Harry (or dad as I call him!), I know any platform he has is that he makes every effort to understand issues in his area, listen to the concerns of local people, and tries to represent those views at council. Zero personal agenda, just trying to do the best for his town and the people. Also, an Oxford season-ticket holder of 40+ years and a certain supporter for the stadium development, as confirmed by @bicesteroxHave updated the opening posts, thank you. Fraser Webster is the incumbent there, but is not standing again. He is an Independent, so at face value Harry Knight would be the favourite to win the seat as his 'successor'. Do you know what the situation is there locally as to why Fraser Webster was elected in the first place (ahead of party political candidates for example)? And do we know whether Harry Knight is standing on a similar platform, and therefore likely to win again?
Guys, these emails really work! David Bunn, Chair for Bloxham Parish came to see me! He said it was easier talk face to face. Very supportive of this community project! He was rather disturbed when I told him about candidates from Kidlington hoping to gain seats in Banbury/ Cropredy...
So for me David Bunn (Lib dem) has 5 votes from my household!
And 3 from my householdGuys, these emails really work! David Bunn, Chair for Bloxham Parish came to see me! He said it was easier talk face to face. Very supportive of this community project! He was rather disturbed when I told him about candidates from Kidlington hoping to gain seats in Banbury/ Cropredy...
So for me David Bunn (Lib dem) has 5 votes from my household!
Guys, these emails really work! David Bunn, Chair for Bloxham Parish came to see me! He said it was easier talk face to face. Very supportive of this community project! He was rather disturbed when I told him about candidates from Kidlington hoping to gain seats in Banbury/ Cropredy...
So for me David Bunn (Lib dem) has 5 votes from my household!
Top work! Surprised at a LibDem supporting it however.
David Bunn is a Conservative candidate
Local Election candidates named - Banbury FM
The candidates for the Local Elections on May 4 have been revealed with one-third of the seats on Cherwell District Council to be decided.banburyfm.com
Am I correct in saying the photo ID will be needing to vote .
Am I correct in saying the photo ID will be needing to vote .
It seems a correct approach to me, no point in getting someone on the Council if they cannot support us when the time comes.I am starting to receive a few replies to my emails too now, and am steadily updating the opening posts with Pro/Anti tags for candidates as appropriate based on what I've seen, and what is being reported in this thread - let's keep it up! We have our first YellowsForum recommended candidate now as a result, with Harry Knight the man for Bicester West due to his positive reaction to the stadium, and due to him being best placed to win the seat based on historic voting in that ward.
Some of the responses I have received have made the point that anyone on the planning committee may have to excuse themselves from voting on the issue when it comes to the committee if there are any allegations of pre-determining their mind on the decision before the facts have been presented. This is being stated as a reason for not giving a full-throated positive response to some of the emails I have sent. Apparently this is an issue because the planning committee is 'quasi judicial'. I am not 100% sure I understand this exactly, but it does sound plausible and does also sound like the kind of technicality that Ian Middleton and FoSB would be all over if they thought they could make hay out of it. On that basis I am suggesting we relax the high bar for being marked as 'Pro', providing that candidates at least appear to be supportive and not closed-minded to the new stadium from the off. Would be good to hear if others agree or disagree with this approach.
Makes sense from a governance point of view. This will be why matey boy constantly proclaims cautious neutrality (aka plausible deniability) despite clearly not actually being neutral.I am starting to receive a few replies to my emails too now, and am steadily updating the opening posts with Pro/Anti tags for candidates as appropriate based on what I've seen, and what is being reported in this thread - let's keep it up! We have our first YellowsForum recommended candidate now as a result, with Harry Knight the man for Bicester West due to his positive reaction to the stadium, and due to him being best placed to win the seat based on historic voting in that ward.
Some of the responses I have received have made the point that anyone on the planning committee may have to excuse themselves from voting on the issue when it comes to the committee if there are any allegations of pre-determining their mind on the decision before the facts have been presented. This is being stated as a reason for not giving a full-throated positive response to some of the emails I have sent. Apparently this is an issue because the planning committee is 'quasi judicial'. I am not 100% sure I understand this exactly, but it does sound plausible and does also sound like the kind of technicality that Ian Middleton and FoSB would be all over if they thought they could make hay out of it. On that basis I am suggesting we relax the high bar for being marked as 'Pro', providing that candidates at least appear to be supportive and not closed-minded to the new stadium from the off. Would be good to hear if others agree or disagree with this approach.
The job of the planning committee is to discuss the recommendation of the planning officer with regards to the planning application. In simple terms, the planning officer makes the decision and the committee ratify or reject his decision.Some of the responses I have received have made the point that anyone on the planning committee may have to excuse themselves from voting on the issue when it comes to the committee if there are any allegations of pre-determining their mind on the decision before the facts have been presented. This is being stated as a reason for not giving a full-throated positive response to some of the emails I have sent. Apparently this is an issue because the planning committee is 'quasi judicial'. I am not 100% sure I understand this exactly, but it does sound plausible and does also sound like the kind of technicality that Ian Middleton and FoSB would be all over if they thought they could make hay out of it. On that basis I am suggesting we relax the high bar for being marked as 'Pro', providing that candidates at least appear to be supportive and not closed-minded to the new stadium from the off.
The job of the planning committee is to discuss the recommendation of the planning officer with regards to the planning application. In simple terms, the planning officer makes the decision and the committee ratify or reject his decision.
I have previously linked to the LGA document regarding the roles and obligations of councillors selected to form a planning committee when coming to a decision but I will repeat the guidance on "pre-determination" as that is what I think is being suggested above. View attachment 12871