When the Rye Amenity CIC was incorporated in 2011, with a board of directors comprising Rye town councillors, its stated aim was to “provide benefit to the people, community and town of Rye”. It would do this by securing “continued access to allotments for community members in Rye” and its “expanded work would serve to improve local amenities in Rye and the surrounding area, [benefitting] local facilities, public services and the environment”.
How disappointing then, that ten years on, it seems to be falling short not only on these expanded aims - its activities appear limited to the management of the town’s two allotment sites - but on the very basics of executing its responsibilities in respect of the allotments, and in its stewardship of the vital community assets entrusted to it.
With ongoing issues relating to invoicing plot-holders, vacant plots remaining unallocated, and a failure to make long-term investments in the allotment sites to ensure they remain viable community assets, two questions have to be asked: what exactly is the point of this CIC? And, is it time for the directors of the CIC to step aside and acknowledge they no longer have the energy or enthusiasm for this role?
A town like Rye relies heavily on an army of volunteers: the food bank, Rye Mutual Aid, scouts, brownies, Tilling Green vaccination centre, community transport (to name but a few), are all supported and maintained by people who give their time and energy freely. But an important part of volunteering is knowing when you are over-stretched and when it’s time to step away to avoid doing harm to the very organisations you intended to help.
On several occasions I have been "reminded" that the directors of the CIC - Ian Potter, Shaun Rogers and Pat Hughes - are volunteers, that they contribute much to the town of Rye, and that they are well-intentioned. I have no reason to doubt that, but it is increasingly clear that those contributions are not being made in respect of their responsibilities as directors of Rye Amenity CIC, and that the allotments - or seemingly broader issues of local amenity - are not a priority for them. Let’s face it, good intentions do not get bills issued in a timely fashion, allotments allocated as soon as they become available, and it does not secure investment in the sites to ensure that they remain accessible to all, and that the amenity is preserved!
Allotment group members have repeatedly made offers to the Rye Amenity CIC to assist in all elements of administration of the allotment sites to ensure they remain thriving communities, but these have been rejected. Perhaps more disappointingly, the Rye Amenity CIC seems now to be ignoring communications with the Rye South Undercliff Allotment Group - despite identifying the allotment group as a key stakeholder within their Companies House submissions.
In their recent Community Interest Company Report submitted to Companies House, the directors stated that their key worker status during the pandemic has hindered their ability to engage as effectively as they might with their stakeholders. In which case, why haven’t they been prepared to delegate more responsibilities to the allotment committees to shoulder that burden on their behalf, and more importantly, how has one of the directors found time to take on a significant additional public appointment during this period? Is it perhaps that they have just lost interest in the allotments? What is preventing them from acknowledging that they are no longer the people to manage and protect these important community assets?
In December, Rye Town Council discussed the future of the allotments and a proposal that they should ask Rother District Council to transfer the freeholds of the allotments to Rye Town Council. We can but hope that if this happens, those town councillors who have failed so singularly in their CIC responsibilities relating to the allotments, will take a step back from any involvement in their future running.
