Before we start, here is a list of the LAT's that are supposed to be operating in our area taken from the safeinthecity.info website
# The Lanes, LAT (confirmed)
# Brunswick and Adelaide LAT (new)
# Brunswick & Regency (us?)
# Clifton, Montpelier, Powis Community Alliance (possibly more a 'friends' group)
# Regency (Old Town) LAT (is this the same as the Lanes LAT?)
# Seafront LAT (no one has heard of this one)
# Brunswick & Regency Neighbourhood Action Group (definate us!)
# Norfolk Square (the FONS merged with the EBRA in 2007)
# Friends of Palmeira (and Adelaide? definately the FOPA)
# Palmeira & Adelaide Residents Association
Please provide the following information in respect of your LAT
1. What is the name of the LAT?
2. Which ward/s does the LAT cover?
3. What is the geographical boundary of the LAT (Please be specific –eg ‘The area bounded by Lewes Road to the east, the Vogue Gyratory to the North, Upper Lewes Road to the west and Union Road to the south, and including the Level’)
4. How often does the LAT meet?
5. Where does the LAT meet?
6. Who is the Chair/facilitator
7. Who else regularly attends (e.g. police, ward councilors, anti-social behaviour officer, housing officer, local residents/businesses/community groups etc…)
8. Who may attend? Are individuals/residents welcome or only those representing groups?
9. Contact details – email/phone number – usually the chair or facilitator
10. What are the three local policing priorities agreed by the LAT?
11. We would like to include a ‘chairs report’ as a downloadable document. This will give an overview of the workings of the LAT/topics covered/and example of a success. This should be written to last for at least 3 months without updating. Would you like to include this document?
12. Do you have any additional community safety-related documents that you would like to appear on your LAT’s web page?
On 15 August 2009 at 18:42 Paul Elgood <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
> wrote:
Dear Claire
Thank you for the email. I see you are Brunswick and Regency LAT, could you please clarify because as the ward councillor, I wasn't aware there was such a thing! Brunswick and Adelaide ward already has a successful LAT.
I'd be grateful for your clarification.
Rgds, Paul
To: "Paul Elgood" <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Saturday, 15 August, 2009, 8:14 PM
Thank you for the email and taking the time to read our newsletter.
I agree that Brunswick and Adelaide have a thriving LAT, from that Bill Cowell feeds a lot of information into the B&R-nag, along with the other Regency based groups.
I am not sure how you are unaware that B&R nag (LAT) exists as the LAT Forum, all 3 local divisions and the Safe in the city website mention us as one.
http://www.safeinthecity.info/?q=neighbourhoods/lats/brunswick
Even our own nagger newsletter has made this reference several times since the closure of NRF.
There has been much confusion and debate about what a LAT/NAG/FOG/RA is recently, and where their (political,residential,moral,police) boundaries all are. As the B&R nag is recognised as performing an "umbrella" group and networking role across all the groups, it has been described as a Super LAT by the LATcf and the 3 police divisions. The area we cover is shown by the large map shown on the front of the website.
So I am not sure how you missed these discussions about the work done, and the networking provided by the B&R website.
If you have any more questions, then please feel free to ask, attend one of the meetings.
Claire
OBO
Liam Mandville - Chair
16/8/09 from EBRA
Dear All
Paul is not alone in finding all these LATs confusing.
If the Police who set them up talked with the various groups in the area I think we could cut down on the many LAT meetings and the Police would start using joined up writing.
As it is Hove and Brighton join at Norfolk Sq and it would appear that there is not contact between the two Police stations. They are territorial when it comes to who does what.
I stress we are very happy with our PCSOs but they need to be able work in each others patches and to understand that we as groups do not have the same boundaries as they do.
By the way at weekends we no longer have a Police Station in Hove, they are on a five day week. So who do we turn to when routine Police matters arrive over the weekends?
Bill Cowell
Co Chair
http://www.eastbrunswick.co.uk
17/08/09
Hi Paul
Just to clarify the situation re-LATs, NAGs etc. Brunswick and Regency NAG had the five floor targets of Neighbourhood Renewal one of which was Crime – as such all Neighbourhood Action Groups were the forerunner of LATs which came about when Police targets were changed to include community priorities and then were charged to tackle fear of Crime. From its creation B&R NAG has had crime as a high priority – fed into the police JAG process, had representation (albeit patchy) and is recognised as performing the function of a LAT along with many other groups in the city that do not have LAT in their title.
Hope this helps – happy to chat further and update you on all developments of the group
Best wishes
Andy Silsby
Community Development Consultant
Serendipity Enterprising Solutions CIC
17th
Hi Andy
Not seeking to undermine the good work of your LAT, or Julie/Sarah's LAT, which I think has really got off to a very good start, it just seems madness to have two in Brunswick & Adelaide. Why don't you just merge the two and avoid the duplication and have one LAT for Brunswick & Adelaide? The link between Brunswick and Regency has never really worked anyway.
I've put in a fair amount of time supporting Julie and Sarah's LAT, not even aware the NAG had become one too!
Rgds, Paul
17th
Hi Paul
Working relationships with the Police are regular feature of the NAG as shown in the minutes – not a case of becoming a LAT rather the fact that it was already performing the function of one, prior to the formation of the Brunswick and Adelaide one. Reason for the non-combination is I am afraid the continuing issue relating to non-coterminous boundaries. Again happy to meet and chat
Cheers
Andy
Hi Andy
My surprise was suddenly seeing it called a LAT, whereas previously I'd known it to be a NAG.
Surely, the two should meet as one, with the additional functions of the NAG simply being a supplementary item on the agenda? When I sat on the council's P&R committee we were also the statutory Social Services Committee and when those items came up we simply moved into being that committee. It was so smoothly done that most of the committee didn't realise!
The problem is residents just do not understand the bureaucratic boundaries that are imposed on us. Also I do think the Julie / Sarah LAT (as I refer to it) has had a very good start and by bringing the two together can only improve both LATs.
My view was echoed by Bill Cowell's email - if you need a copy let me know.
Who is the lead officer on LATs?
Rgds, Paul
Hi Paul
The confusion was recently addressed when the Partnership Community Safety Team under Linda Beanlands held two conferences for all groups and organisations that were called or performed the function of a LAT (as is the case with B&R NAG) as I understand it at present those fitting that description are currently featured on the Safe in the City web with B&R NAG not being the only one that performed a LAT function but was not called one. The primary issue is once again the NAG covers two police areas and while there is an intention to be policed as a city there is still demarcation along the lines of the existing districts. The issue of duplication was raised when the Brunswick and Adelaide LAT was being started (with the police and BHCC) but it proceeded to formation. Currently we have police representation and are planning to promote the B&A LAT at our forthcoming event in September.
Hope this helps a bit
Best wishes
Andy
Andy
Whilst I am grateful for the answer - its all jargon to me!!
So should I raise with Linda?
Rgds, Paul
I would – we did – good luck
Cheers
Andy
Andy Silsby
-----