David,
I agree that the actual time spent on enquiries has been reduced, but we
justify our charges to developers on the basis that they are using a
public-funded database for commercial gain. At the end of the day the
charges are a fraction of a developers costs.
It also keeps our local politicians happy to be seen to generate income to
partially recover operating costs (a dangerous path I know).
Simon Thorpe
Sites & Monuments Officer
Winchester City Council.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Evans [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 10:26 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: SMR charging policy
>
> We are presenty considering our service plan for 2000/01. At present
> we charge contractors/developers for supplying SMR trawls but I am
> seriouly considering removing the charge. I don't know about the rest of
> you but my charging started in the time of SuperFile, slow computers,
> daisy wheel printers and no internet. A decent sized trawl could take a
> few hours and could seriously detract from other work and was not
> considered as core SMR work. now I can do a complex trawl and e-mail
> it out in half an hour. I also feel that we are being unfair to
> contractors
> (never), after all we tell them to contact the SMR for information, and
> then charge them.
> Any thoughts are welcome
> **********************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
> the system manager.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
> MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
>
> www.mimesweeper.com
> **********************************************************************
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|