 |
 |
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 > ********************************************************************** %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%