The River Community Council meetings can be lively affairs and last night was no exception. More later this evening on events in the community centre last night but now a few words about the Common Good.
Stephanie regularly raises issues members of the public raise with her on the street and last night she told the meeting that a lot of people were concerned about the common good fund. These concerns seemed to be shared around the table with the words 'conflict of interest' being muttered and one community councillor even suggested that given the situation the name 'Common Good' should be dropped.
Highland Councillors Liz and Graham, who were present, entered the debate with the claim that, at present, the Highland Council subsidises the Common Good fund and without the council's help the fund would be short of money. Liz mentioned the new Maggot car park as one example. Tommy suggested the fund was short of money because there was no longer any income from Sandown.
Out of this debate came an important fact from Liz that no doubt the Common Good campaigners in the town will analyse deeply. She stated that Sandown was not Common Good Land but a Common Good Asset and that also a young man had recently got into trouble for using his motorbike on this land under the erroneous impression that he had the right to do so.
It looks like we are moving to a debate over the Common Good Fund gurnites, this is not a bad thing at all. The Gurn has made no secret that it supports those who wish for more public input into the decision making process, ideally by incorporating those elected to the new proposed Royal Burgh of Nairn Community Council into the fund administration. Whatever the immediate outcome there can be no doubt that the Common Good will play a part in the public inquiry over Sandown that will take place next year.
A final point, Graham reminded the meeting that the first £2,000,000 of any sale of the main asset would go to pay for the community centre.
More this evening on River Community Council issues.