silvergull wrote:Thank you Steve for your full and comprehensive reply. I am sorry it took my post to ellcit this, but I thank you for the time and trouble taken even if on some points we will have to agree to differ.
I must correct you on one point: the approval of surrey trf funding for Hydons lane was voted on, and the group officers agreed reluctanly to support, in view of the fact the decision to support with funds had been promised BEFORE the meeting took place, without the knowledge of the officers. So the decision was in fact reached under duress, and it was also agreed at the same meeting by all present that in future no support would be given unless consulted first. It is true that I was the only one not to support, on the principle that we shoud have been asked to vote before funds were comittted, and for the reason that hydons lane was in perfectly good condition, and required no repair. The perceived PR gains never came to pass, as we saw recently in later TRO decisions in Hants. But that is as you say in the past, and we move on. but the group decision was carried, but not with good feeling from all present, and this was made clear to you at the time.( I recall you were not there for that one). Just to be clear.
I have no more words on this, and I wish you success in the future .
All the best, bc
Thank you for your gracious reply Brian.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk