NCPF Public Meeting 30 June 2010 Minutes

Document Sample
NCPF Public Meeting 30 June 2010 Minutes Powered By Docstoc
              DATE OF MEETING – 30 JUNE 2010



 Duncan Barker          - DB    - NCPF

 Nick Barklem           - NB    - NCPF

 Aimee Ginsburg         - AG    - NCPF

 Jacqueline Ramara      - JR    - NCPF

 Sol Cowan              - SC    - NCPF

 Wendy Rubenstein       - WR    - VSU

 Ray Wolder             - RW    -S2&4

 Mervyn Cirota          - MC    -S2&4


 Linda Makhabela        - LM             Geraldine Hochman   - GH

 D Hochman              - DH             Nicholas Othonos    - NO

 Darryl Marcus          - DM             Jonathan Malkin     - JM

 Ayanda Buthelezi       -AB (Caxton)


 Russell Cohen          - RC             Eda Meltzer         - EM – NORA

 Marcelle Bloom-Ravid   - MBR
1.   Welcome

     DB welcomed the attendees and the committee members present.

2    Apologies

     As listed above.

3.   Minutes, meetings & record keeping

     Minutes & record keeping
     DB brought up the issue that the CPF does not have a secretary and this has meant that
     the minutes and record keeping has been slow.
     DB also queried how long we should keep our records as there was no detail in the
     constitution regarding this.

     MC – Three years should be sufficient.

     DB put it to the floor that he would like to dispose of all paper based records that are older
     than three years from year beginning 1 April 2010.                                               DB
     This was accepted by the members present
     NB – We should recycle the paper to be used by all the members.

     CPF meetings for the rest of the year will be the following:

     Public meetings – Bi-monthly

         -     25 August 2010

         -    27 October 2010

         -    24 November 2010

     Executive committee meetings – Bi-monthly

         -    28 July 2010

         -    29 September 2010

     Sector crime forums – These will be forwarded to us

4.   Finances

     There was no financial report for the meeting. This will be presented at the next meeting
     to be held in July.

     The Audit of the financials was discussed and Mr N Orthonos (N.O.) suggested that two
     members of the executive committee can sign off the accounts as a true reflection. The
     Chairman and another member of the Executive (SC, AE, JR or NB) would be the

     The signatories on the Nebank bank account were changed to DB, SC and AE. The
     Standard Bank account will be closed by signing a cheque for the balance and
     transferring that over to the Nebank account.

     SC – will set up a meeting with the Nedbank to negotiate a lower or minimal fee account
     and to discuss our options going forward.

5.   Section 21 Company

     DB presented to the members and public present the desire to change the current CPF
     into a S21 company. The name has been reserved through CIPRO and he had been
     pushing forward to gather information and the other details for this.

     NO suggested that this was not necessary as the CPF could merely become a PBO
     (Public benefit organization) instead of a S21 company registered in terms of the
     Companies Act.

     MC mentioned that this had been mooted at Bramley but not allowed.

     DB to meet with NO to discuss the possibilities and logistics of changing the CPF to a
     PBO.                                                                                            DB

6.   Norwood CPF Initiatives

     General discussion about the initiatives already in place in our area.

     1& 2 – Crime forums & S2 & 4 Crime forum report

     MC presented this report:

         •       Councilors are important to our committee and the work of the GFA (Geographic
                 Focus Area) is proving invaluable for our area. Earl Stoles & Nazira Cachalia
                 are doing great work.

         •       They are concentrating efforts on by-law and land usage enforcement.

         •       Doing this through getting the different departments in the city to work together
                 and get more involved in performing their mandated duties.

         •       JMPD is not involved enough in by-law enforcement. This is partly due to their
                 capacity constraints in terms of personnel.
                 They are also not knowledgeable on the by-laws they are there to enforce.
                 Neither are the SAPS.

         •       There is a car wash and other illegal activities being carried on at 504 Louis
                 Botha Ave.

     3 – Website & GFA

     All discussed.

     4 - Other
     The case of 20 15 Str was brought up. The couple were present and discussed the
     details of their fight with a neighbor who is building illegally. There was a discussion on
     the new legislation dealing with communes.
     The house is one of many in their road that have been an issue now and in the past. The
     City of Johannesburg (COJ) has been unhelpful and sent them on a run-around for years.
     The building inspectors did come out.
     There was a concern from the residents that the SAPS have been called out to harass
     them and advise to them to stop their course of action. The NCPF have promised that
     they will look into this. The event occurred on the 26 June 2010 at 19:00 and then again          DB
     on the 30 June 2010 the NW 52 vehicle was spotted in their road & at their neighbours.

     Previously the SAPS have been unwilling to assist with this as it is out of their jurisdiction.

     Illegal land use and the enforcement of the relevant by-laws restricting this was once
     again discussed.
     JM – brought up the concern legitimate businesses on Grant Ave were being chased for
     their licenses and regulations enforced on them. This represents a waste of resources
     when there are other more serious crimes to enforce. Why not focus on Louis Botha?
     NB – The focus is on legality of businesses and their need for security. There is a
     requirement to make all businesses comply with the law in order to ensure that all are on
     the same page.
     The CPF did hold a meeting for the businesses on Grant Ave but hardly any of them
     came to it.
     JM – There must be one operation and it should be careful to not represent harassment.
     The general consensus is that the law must be followed no matter who or where you are
     in our area.

     DM - 5 & 7 Osborne was brought up and discussed.

7.   The following initiatives & items were discussed:

     The school programme with Const Sanyani needs to be up and running. There was a
     concern raised that there is a low profile of this department/division in the SAPS.

     MC – need more press as most of it is negative.
     The CPF should show what is achieved at the operations with the press & get them

     AE – presented the plan of creating a spatial representation of the area and the crimes
     that are occurring in the relevant suburbs/areas. It will be a powerful tool that can be
     used by ourselves and the police to track issues.

8    Youth group – this was not discussed due to time constraints

9    SC – had an incident where he was threatened at an intersection on the road by a man
     wielding a weapon (firearm). He laid a charge with the police with all the details and the
     case was withdrawn by the Public prosecutor due to there being little chance of
     The NCPF finds this unacceptable and will push forward to obtain a court appearance for
     the person and prosecution privately.

     The NCPF agrees that this is a precedent as that person is a danger and could hurt
     someone in the future if he is not prosecuted for his threatening actions.

Shared By: