The AGM of the Ardglass Development Association last Monday evening held in a packed upstairs room in the Ardglasss Maritime Heritage Centre identified one major issue in the community… it demonstrated that there was a need for residents in the village to understand their existing governance document i.e. the constitution, to ensure that any changes and moves to ‘improve’ the Association are in fact genuine alterations.
The meeting was chaired by outgoing chairperson Margaret Smyth who was subsequently re-elected back on to the new group of office bearers. In recent weeks there had been a clamour in the village for the Association to hold its annual AGM which it finally conceded to doing following pressure from myself as an Ardglass resident and a number of others.
At the meeting, local residents did raise some key points about their Association performance and about its workings and many were left with a continuing frustration that the outgoing committee were changing the governance goalposts without the local residents being fully aware of a number of key issues regarding the process.
There was consternation at the AGM not being called by advertising the meeting in the most prominent places in the village, and about the notices not going up in the allocated time according to their current constitution. It would also have been useful if an agenda had been posted.
But there was a healthy debate – as far as some local residents could push it. The presence of three police officers on the premises and at the meeting following the banning of one individual prior to the meeting put an edge to the proceedings followed by a strong opening statement from the chair that anyone causing a disruption would be removed from the meeting. It appears that dissenting voices were seen to be unwelcome. This signalled to some present that the Association was in some eyes not prepared to move on and tolerate a heavy line of vigorous questions considering it had not held an open AGM for some years. The person concerned, a disabled elderly man who was a former member of the Association committee, has subsequently made a complaint to the NI Police Ombudsman about being blocked from attending the AGM meeting of the Association by the police. A possible complaint on disability discrimination to the Association may also follow.
Whilst there was a general call for the process to move on and for the people of the community to be more involved in the process, there was a deficit of information at the meeting to explain the Association’s structures and operations, and to clarify key points. For example, the Association has set up two companies recently: Ardglass Development Association CP Ltd and The Centre for Excellence in Micrograms and Energy Storage, Bishopscourt Ltd. (The directors of companies are noted below).
Cadogan Enright, a local Downpatrick Councillor, acted as project manager in the refurbishment of the new centre which is awaiting full planning permission after enforcement notices were served by the Council planners. There was minimal information about the maritime heritage centre given at the AGM and again those attending were largely in the dark about it.
The Association is still maintaining its position over Phennick Cove Developments that “We will have to speak to them” as Margaret Smyth intimated at the AGM. However, despite the political campaign by Councillor Cadogan Enright who has fought to have the marina back in the Association fold, the Charities Commission for Northern Ireland has finally deemed that the marina company is in fact an independent charity and has given it charitable status. With this status comes specific objectives such as the marina body having to have annual AGM’s and selecting directors on a three year cycle and making their finances transparent on the CCNI website.
At the moment the marina has a sum of approx £190,000 in its cash fund and the Association is calling for some of this to be released to the community groups in Ardglass. This fund allows covering operational matters such as maintenance of pontoon repairs, dredging, general maintenance etc.
However, the Association will need to accept that Phennick Cove Developments has a Five Year Development Plan 2016-2021 for the marina to extend parts of the main marina building and improve services including access by the public. But, against claims by some in Ardglass that the marina has not been accessible to the people of Ardglass, the marina trustees argue that no marina locally for security and health and safety issues has a public open door policy. Down News understands plans are well advanced and the actual strategy document which will address future marina developments has been drawn up. And when this is finally announced by the marina trustees, local residents as well as tourists and visiting yacht’s people, will ultimately be impressed with the vision of the developments and see this as a major plus for Ardglass and its flagship community project, the Phennick Cove Marina. Clearly, as it reads at the present moment, the Charities Commission NI see no formal linkage between the Association and Ardglass marina.
Too much water has flowed under the bridge since the marina opened in 1997 and it has operated independently since that date from the Association. It remains now to be seen where Councillor Cadogan Enright’s political campaign to restore the marina back into community hands goes from here? The decision of two law firms that the Association consulted indicated that a direct case against the then directors of the marina was unlikely to happen in court.
ADA does itself not itself have an area-based strategy going forward based on a community consultation process. The current round of rural development grants require that this is in place along with other criteria such as community cooperation between various on community planning. But confidence in the Association needs to build if this is to happen, and at the moment not all groups are going to support their initiative to form a forum of community groups for various reasons. There needs to be community dialogue, not the reverse of closing people down and blocking people out of the community process if Ardglass is to move on.
There was an attempt from the floor of the AGM to ask the chairperson Margaret Smyth to explain what the two companies that the Association has set up are for and their role. This was not explained at the meeting and Down News understands that the directors of these companies SHOULD be elected annually at the Association AGM. This did not happen. The chair said this would all be explained on the ADA Facebook page. If this was a fundamental breach of the rules then it will do nothing to bolster the low confidence people in the Ardglass community have for the Association despite efforts to talk it up at the AGM. It may still have a long way to go to establish stronger levels of trust.
There is some confusion too around the adoption of a new constitution for the Association. Again people in the village are not aware of the contents of the current original association constitution which in effect is their governing document until a new one is properly adopted. The chair, waving a new 40-page constitution in the air, asked the meeting to adopt this new document without anyone having read it.
Immediately there was a furore as persons in the room who understand committee procedures said that this was improper as, firstly no one had read it, and secondly, changes in the constitution needed now to go to a Special Meeting called under the rules of the current older constitution which is still valid and recognised by CCNI. The chair did say that the new constitution was very detailed and after much prompting agreed to put it on the Association Facebook page/website for access and also to leave copies around Ardglass in suitable venues for people to read. She indicated a meeting would be called this coming Monday evening ‘to adopt the constitution’ …. but some present felt this was premature.
However, there may be amendments and changes required and this adoption may not be as straight forward as may seem if it is to include everyone’s views and be passed at this meeting. If the constitution is to be ‘adopted’ at this meeting then appropriate notices do need to be circulated around the community as per the current constitution requirements for calling such a meeting.
One point that some people were concerned about focussed on the issue of the proposed new constitution making the Association a forum of groups. This appears to exclude the rights of individuals who may wish to go forward onto the committee, but the small print will have to be studied to clarify this. Such a change in procedure would be a major democratic shift and lead to a concentration of power in the hands of a narrow band of groups which would not be representative of the village and would be basically unhealthy from a community development point-of-view especially when their representatives do no live in the village.
The Association also only elected five officers – a chair, two joint vice chairs, a secretary and treasurer. There were no non-portfolioed members taken on board as was required by the current constitution at an AGM. As a result these vacancies will likely be filled through a process of co-option or election at this meeting on Monday evening. This should have been done at the AGM. However, the Chair indicated that this procedure seems to have been acceptable to the CCNI, but it certainly was not acceptable to a significant number of people at the meeting.
So, if the Ardglass community development process is destined to be run by a consortium of groups, it does beg the question: why is the current constitution being ignored? What are the benefits of this proposal? Did the CCNI in fact approve this manoeuvre? The older original constitution which may well need modernisation or replacement indicates that the Association can be a forum of individual members, groups, businesses, organisations etc – again, residents present were curious as to why the Association cannot just formalise the arrangement of a forum internally? Why all the hype? Why the need to change the constitution? Why re-invent the wheel?
This may become apparent to the people of Ardglass and the Lecale in due course as Down News has information to suggest there may be an extra dimension to this apparent ‘split’ between groups in Ardglass and that there is in fact a more fundamental malaise in the local community underpinning this issue.
Down News has spoken to the Charities Commission of NI and was told that each charity must obey the charity laws and, secondly, obey its governance document. In this case the Association should be working fully to its old and current constitution until a new one is adopted legitimately at a properly convened meeting.
There are key issues to be resolved and it is healthy that some of the people in Ardglass at least are trying to engage in a constructive debate with positive outcomes. This is the first proper debate held for several years and the many important issues raised did overwhelm the AGM meeting despite another meeting held the previous Monday to try and clear the some of the issues up.
Many groups are not aware of the undercurrents in this process and they will in time no doubt become apparent if a new constitution is pressed through for the wrong reasons. But by then the new constitution may have become a poisoned chalice to the Association.
Asking questions is not a negative process, on the contrary, it is a sign of a healthy open, transparent, fair, accountable and trusting community, one in which each and every individual is accepted and inclusively valued. Brushing the past under the carpet is not good housekeeping practice.
********************
Extra info on ADA companies as Per Companies House Registration:
Directors of the ADA companies:
Ardglass Development Association CP Ltd.
Mary McCargo 19a High Street
Margaret Smyth 19a High Street
Douglas Semple (resigned) 10 St Michael Park.
Directors of the The Centre for Excellence and Microgrids
Alan Montgomery 19a High Street (resigned)
Nigel Montgomery 19a High Street
David Surplus 19a High Street
Robert Milligan 9a High Green
Cadogan Enright 19a High Street
Mary McCargo, 19a High Street.
