Archive Announcements

Budget 2020

Chair

The budget is an elaboration of the framework memorandum. In the framework memorandum, Jouw Stellingwarfs has agreed to the council's proposals. The council writes that the basis of this budget is the council program and we agree with this.
All municipalities are struggling with major deficits and have to make cuts. Weststellingwerf must also sail strong financially. The shortages in youth care, among others, have already been discussed extensively.

Stay Stellingwarfs is also satisfied that the council can present a budget that, despite the deficits in the first 2 years, provides a positive result for the last 2 years.
We also find it important that this means that the costs for our residents will increase at a maximum of inflation.

We support your ambitions to implement the chosen investment program, despite the financial limitations, as well as the proposed coverage from the precario funds.
Much has been said and discussed about the risks. So we're not going to repeat that.
Chairman: Stay Stellingwarfs is disappointed that the gas extraction and gas extraction problems receive little or no attention, nothing is budgeted for it, while this could become a major financial risk in the future. We have therefore submitted a motion.

We do have a comment about answering technical questions. Because after our feeling things turned out very unsatisfactory, nothing to the detriment of the people who presented this, they deserve a compliment; We would like to propose that the following year the written questions will again be answered in writing by the council.
To the extent that.

Thank you

Autumn memorandum 2019

Chair,

The autumn memorandum only contains a limited number of changes and developments. The explanations of the various programs are sufficient for Stay Stellingwarfs and we therefore agree with them.
We would like to make a comment about De Kantine De Steense.
The written questions we had asked were not, or were not allowed to be, answered.
The alderman has promised the Council to fully inform us in the autumn memorandum and this also means being publicly accountable for the chosen policy and process.

In our opinion, this process of public accountability does not have a democratic, transparent follow-up to the residents. We, as Stay Stellingwarfs, believe that everything will be put on the table in the currently proposed working meeting about this and that the responsible councilor himself will provide the presentation in the working meeting.
Thank you chairman.


Note:

A. What were the income and expenses for the municipality in 2018.
Also include the costs for (European) tendering. Also the new situation, under our own management.

B. What are the expected income and expenses for 2020 (incl. salary manager). And input of staff who are disadvantaged in the labor market, as desired.

C. Not financial: Why did the council choose the new manager even though his tender was rejected?

Questions Stay Stellingwarfs: Questions quarter municipal meeting May 13, 2019.

Dear Chairman,

At the consultation hour meeting, Mr Kroon from Steggerda spoke about the bridge at the Driewegsluis. Mooring there and then opening, passing and closing the pedestrian bridge is (almost) impossible. Not to mention if you have difficulty walking. We as Stay Stellingwarfs experienced this together with Mr. Kroon, sailing on and mooring with his boat.
During the meeting it was not known who owns the surrounding land, which is important. Research shows that it is the municipality. We as a municipality would like to be known as a tourist municipality and this is certainly not a calling card.

Question: Now that it is known who the owner is, is the council prepared to investigate this problem of construction and passing near and from the bridge and come up with solutions?

Chair,
Local Interests are very active in the field of alternatives for housing construction. This also applies to De Hoever with its exchange housing. We all know that a project there has been started and the permit has been granted.
At the meeting of Local Interest De Hoeve it was stated that, through an anterior agreement, the resident involved must pay an amount of approximately € 20,000 to the municipality. Mr President, this cannot be the intention. This project is in danger of falling into the water. At PB De Hoeve this seems incomprehensible.

Question Chairman, What about the reasonableness of these costs? Does this not put other projects at additional risk, including Tiny Houdses, for example. How can this be reconciled with our policy of less bureaucracy and fewer rules? Can we limit costs?

Chair:
Then there is the canteen management of De Steense. You will understand that Jouw Stellingwarfs is very disappointed with the state of affairs with Van Kerkvoorde. At this moment we have the feeling that this is amateurish bungling that will cost our municipality extra money. Especially since we had already informed the councilor in the middle of last year that there was a very serious local entrepreneur who wanted to accept it.
According to the newspaper, the SDW has submitted a WOB request about this.
Question: Can we as a council receive the complete, detailed, ins and outs about these failed, aborted negotiations this day or week?

Thank you.

Written questions at the council committee meeting of March 15, 2019

Progress restructuring company Caparis:
Weststellingwerf has chosen to no longer remain owner.

1. What settlement costs will generally be incurred by our municipality in this context?
2. Will the interim management continue in the new structure or will there be significant redundancy costs in view of this?

Real price services WMO:
Taking into account that in Europe the Netherlands is relatively behind in income development and that it was recently in the news that PGB clients often have insufficient budget to (continue to) pay professional care providers, this leads to the following questions

1. Are the real costs presented more than an inflation correction?
2. In the past, in the WMO task, it has happened more than once that Weststellingwerf remained well within the annual budget available by the government. What exactly happened to these surpluses, and can they still be used to expand the so-called “real costs”?
3. Have the findings of the audit office (preliminary investigation into the social domain - youth) also been included in the investigation: real cost price of the WMO?

College program 2018-2022, November 5, 2018

Chairman, members of the council, aldermen and residents of Weststellingwerf.
Chair,

We took note of this lecture program with attention and with occasional moments of surprise.
The power of Together and Doing, a beautiful motto. Unfortunately, this was not yet apparent in the composition of the council, as almost half of the council was sidelined. Involving society and residents together in decision-making is a beautiful text, but in our opinion the following sentence makes society less cheerful. The board establishes policy, grants or refuses permits and supervises.
A factual observation, but thinking citizens could possibly lose the desire to think along as a result. Anyway, the council wants a situation where the approach is: “Yes, provided” instead of “it is not possible because it does not fit in with the policy”. We believe that this new policy will require the necessary adjustments for the council members, but certainly for our civil service.

Doing is the new credo and this involves an appeal to self-reliance, informal care and volunteer work. Good consultation and flexible handling of the rules are very important. This has sometimes been lacking in the past. Consider a first aid association that was late with its subsidy application and was left out in the cold. Also the informal caregivers where their wishes have not been listened to. For the municipality, giving space to society means letting go and giving confidence. We are curious how this will work.
In the context of administrative renewal, the council has decided to divide centers and districts between the four aldermen. Can we expect a plan on how this initiative will be further shaped in the short term? We also believe that a clear structural approach is important with regard to communication with companies, institutions and associations such as the VKD, CCW and Burgerplatvorm.

According to the college program, this college attaches importance to the specificity of the region, including the regional language. We think that this arrangement will be greeted with joy by the Oudheidkamer and the Stellingwerver Schrieversronte, especially given the policy of recent years. To support this, Jouw Stellingwarfs has made an amendment which we will introduce later in the meeting.
Working and living receive a lot of attention at this college. In itself this is a very good thing, but the role of the municipality is limited or this council must want to create employment itself. For the time being, it remains a list of “thinking about”, “attention to” and the like and no concrete plans.

The council strives for a structurally balanced multi-year budget with room for ambition and a "sustainable" level of housing costs, fees and levies. A noble goal, but there are a number of risks lurking with regard to land development (Lindewijk), Social Domain (Youth Act and WMO) and Social Employment Services that could well throw a spanner in the works. In addition, there is an ambitious investment program with regard to infrastructure, schools and recreational facilities of around eleven million. Apparently the council is partly considering the proceeds of the precario tax for financing this, but this case is still before the courts and the outcome is still unclear. Many plans still need to be made and it may be known by then whether the precario tax will be maintained. Stay Stellingwarfs would like to see concrete plans for these topics and we advocate a high priority for tackling the core of De Blesse. The village itself has made a good plan and they have been waiting for its implementation for a long time.
We wonder whether, given recent developments, this is a plan that should remain unchanged regarding the plan to invest 1.36 million in the Weststellingwerf-Zuid school cluster.
An extra financial boost in the village fund is in itself a good development. How does the council intend to deal with the management and allocation of this fund? Who will coordinate this?
The high VVD content of this council is reflected in the well-known story about reducing restrictive regulations. What rules are specifically meant here? This intention has not yielded any results in recent years, why will it work now?

While writing, Chairman, we realized that addressing all points of this lecture program would result in a speech of about an hour. We will therefore limit ourselves to a number of matters that we consider important, without making any value judgments about the rest of the program.
Organizational development/PIM, an amount of 85,000 euros has been entered for this. We would like to see the usefulness and necessity of this clearly substantiated.
You indicate that you want to develop a coherent vision for education. Does the council hereby indicate that it has so far interrupted this?
With regard to the accessibility of social policy, we are curious about the future evaluation of Griffioenpark 3. The integrated safety policy plan includes, among other things, a pilot neighborhood mediation. Are people already in training for this and if so, how many people are involved?


In the Sports chapter, the council indicates that the accommodations must be mapped out together with the sports clubs. Are these facilities still unknown after all these years?
Artificial grass fields are a costly facility. Are there any requests for this from the sports clubs? And if so, how much?
Strengthening neighborhood sports has the approval of Stay Stellingwarfs. We also think support for sports clubs is a good thing. We will support initiatives in this regard. We prefer a contribution per member of the associations.
A sports platform does not seem feasible to us. Volunteers are difficult to get, especially for a longer-term project.
In our opinion, the Village Hall function for Wolvega is an illusion. There are still sufficient accommodations in Wolvega for all kinds of purposes and creating an expensive institution like this is not feasible in our opinion. The 25,000 euros for a feasibility study would be better spent on something useful.
When increasing Labor and Social Participation, we are curious about the results to be achieved and achieved.
The neighborhood teams will play a pivotal role in the Social Domain transformation. Stay Stellingwarfs wonders whether the teams are good and/or prepared for this.
An amount of 8,000 euros has been estimated for the center manager for the Wolvega shopping center. Dil seems like a budget for which we cannot expect much. In addition, an incidental work budget of 17,000 euros. It all seems a bit small to us for a decisive approach.
An amount of EUR 65,000 for recalibration of welfare work is a significant amount. What will actually happen for this?
As previously noted, Chairman, this meeting program gives rise to many more questions and comments. For the sake of time, a few brief comments follow.
Lindewijk phase 2. How far along is this proposal (12/31/2019 is an important date)?
Environmental vision. How do we proceed with a concrete approach?
Caparis. Does the council ensure that it has a clear finger on the pulse?
Environment. What will happen with asbestos removal on roofs in the coming years?

And finally the OWO collaboration. As Stay Stellingwarfs, we are positive about this collaboration. In recent years it has become apparent that this partnership produces results and is good for the organization.
Mr President, and finally and perhaps at this moment the most important point. Vermillion's proposed decision to further increase natural gas extraction in our municipality, to conduct new research into gas extraction and to restart certain wells. We have made an amendment for this and would like to table it at this meeting.

That concludes our contribution to this discussion.
Mr President, due to the likely length of this meeting, we are refraining from holding a general discussion this year.

Stay Stellingwarfs
Ton Mulder
Ruud Knol

Autumn Memorandum 2018 (BS)

Chair,

Despite the expected negative operating result for 2018 after the spring memorandum, the autumn memorandum shows a positive result of €108,500. This brings the final operating result for 2018 to a negative result of €656,000.
The council explains this because we receive 718,000 less from the government in the September circular. So you can see that government reimbursements are difficult to estimate.
We support the council's proposal to maintain the positive balance within “t Hek” and the General Risk Management provision, given the risks in youth care, and to use it for the possible incidental deficit for 2018.
Mr President, with regard to current developments/bottlenecks, we see that the council expects that an additional EUR 29,000 will be needed in 2018 for the joint project in South East Friesland by Experienced and Turf. The council does not provide any substantiation for this. Can we still expect that?

We are very satisfied with the benefit of more than 1 million on income schemes due to fewer benefit courts.
We are somewhat surprised that the Leergeld Foundation did not fully use the subsidy in 2017. There is a substantiation when applying. What has not been implemented?
That the appeal to Special Assistance will be 80,000 lower. We recently read in a newspaper article that many people in Weststellingwerf have a very low income. How should we view this then? You would expect an appeal on this.
The problems with Youth Care, the settlement system and its consequences, and the financial risks have already been discussed a lot. The efforts made by the council give us confidence in the best possible result.

We have now read that the application to the government for the “deficit municipalities” fund has been partially approved. What happens to the amount to be received?
Mr President, the council's proposal to use the surplus at “t Hek” for the possible deficit for 2018 in youth care has our approval, as does the provision for general risk management.
We have previously expressed our opinion about the precario proceeds.

Finally, the Chairman: the investment plan contains an amount of 300,000 under the TRACtion item.
This also includes 2 electric service cars). It may seem that these cars are extremely expensive. Can we get a specification of this item? And has the correct purchasing/tendering procedure been followed?

To the extent that.

Letter to Parliament on gas extraction

Download file

Answers to parliamentary questions about gas extraction

Download file

Parliamentary questions about gas extraction

Questions from member Van Tongeren (GroenLinks) to the Minister of
Economic Affairs and Climate about the articles «Questions and concerns aboutgas extraction Southwest Drenthe" and "Another gas extraction information evening: Tebusy, too chaotic» (submitted November 30, 2017).
Answer from Minister Wiebes (Economic Affairs and Climate)
Download file

Judicial decision vermillion against board B&W Krimpenerwaard

Download file

Letter to (the members of) the House of Representatives/(members of) the House Committee on EZK

May 2018



Dear (members of the) House (committee)

We realize that the gas dossier is an important item for the House of Representatives. We hope
that you realize that this gas file is also a very important topic for the
residents who live on or around the small gas fields in the Netherlands. We are the residents
around and on the Diever gas field, i.e. the residents of the municipalities
Weststellingwerf (Friesland), Westerveld (Drente) and Steenwijkerland (Overijssel). We
call us GAS DrOvF.
In recent times, resident groups and organizations from various
villages/municipalities are exploring gas extraction. This has led to a number
documents or responses to documents. Looking over these documents and responses, we have
decided to address you with a number of conclusions that can be drawn from this
become. The underlying documents are included as appendices.
Over the years we have made efforts to investigate what is happening
with regard to gas extraction or plans for this in our immediate vicinity and our
region. This applies to the procedures that apply to the government and the operator Vermilion
Energy from Canada; this applies to the control of procedures; this applies to the
agreements that are made and that are not always adhered to, this applies to the
guarantees our safety; this applies to the (im)possibilities of involvement
of the municipalities of which we are part, this applies to damage now and in the
future; this applies to the manner in which claims are settled; this applies to the consequences for
the landscape, and this also applies to the provision of information to residents.
All the above points appear to require us to deal with them.
Central to this is the provision of information.
It appears that we cannot rely solely on the
government and Vermilion Energy. Vermilion Energy is cautious, untimely and selective
providing information. This lack of information for residents also has consequences
with the licensing system. Lots of work, especially drilling work
are arranged internally. For many parts / activities there is currently
permit system, no obligation to provide information. If this is improved, there would be good and...
timely information will be available, which may alleviate a lot of anxiety. Because of this
it also appears that the Ministry is not sufficiently informed about what Vermilion Energy is doing
carries out activities. This may be because Vermilion Energy is not always legally obliged
to report the information; it could also be because of Vermilion Energy's activities
would rather not make it public.
The government has created a Supervisor, but also the Supervisor
it appears that not all the necessary information is available to make a good estimate
safety for local residents or for the landscape. Apparently their position
established insufficiently clearly and with powers. The fact that recently
an amount has been allocated for personnel, indicates that there is a concern with the supervisor
of understaffing.
The government itself seems insufficiently prepared to provide information. It is needed regularly
to make use of the Public Access to Government Act (WoB).
The government partly places the responsibility for information on residents
Vermilion Energy. However, Vermilion Energy points to the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy. Our

Experiences with this have not always been positive due to the selective nature
because it is too late, or because it is only sent after our insistence.
The information often reaches us too late to object to it in a timely manner
requests for enforcement. Then we are sidelined, where we are
formally still have a modest position.
For example, the environmental permit for conversion of an experimental drilling location to...
extraction location often has a maximum daily production that is just below the EIA Nm3
gas per day. For example, by a maximum daily threshold value of 500,000. By means of
for example, a maximum daily production of 480,000 Nm3 of gas per day is necessary
no environmental impact report to be drawn up, while it later appears that this quantity
was never the intended goal, but a much higher daily production. This turned out to be the case
the Wapse drilling location is the case. That is why we advocate that in all cases – and from the outset
from now on - the obligation applies to drawing up an EIS. Obviously for it
gas extraction company and for the environment.
After obtaining the permit, more gas is still extracted and used there
no permit applied for; later Vermilion Energy will simply be given the opportunity
to still apply for a permit for additional extraction. An EIA is also no longer necessary
on the agenda. This failure to indicate correctly by Vermilion also applies to the expected
subsidence.
The techniques used for extraction, such as fracking, do not always comply with those provided
permits. Fracking keeps production going under pressure
expanded, as also happened in Wapse. Only by observant residents and press
it becomes clear how Vermilion works. In Loon op Zand, fracking turned out to be so bad
caused major problems that it had to be stopped.
The permit system is very complicated and therefore not transparent. The supervision of
Compliance with permits leaves much to be desired and is difficult for residents
accessible.
The licenses for exploration permits and extraction that date back decades
provided, still apply, while if one wants to build a shed or a tree
felling, the permit expires after six months. Since the time when the licenses for the
detection and recovery of the gas have been released, there are many experiences with the consequences
of it. We therefore wonder why there is no end date for the permits
stated. We also wonder whether there are options for using the old permits
to withdraw investigation? After all, this government is included in the coalition agreement for a reason
announced that there will be no more permits for the exploration of gas fields
handed in.
We wonder whether a trade-off is not made when issuing a permit
economic interests of the government on the one hand, and the interests of residents and nature
and environment on the other hand must take place. Not only Vermilion Energy is investing in this
areas, but lower authorities and residents and companies also do this. Is there
have these interests been sufficiently taken into account?
The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy clearly opts for economic interests. The lower authorities
such as provinces and municipalities are becoming less and less parties (National Coordination Regulation)
and can therefore hardly provide any counter pressure. Their interests, such as their investments
in nature and the environment, damage to nature and the environment, or the development of residential areas
and industrial estates are being sacrificed to their economic interests
Rich.
If the exploratory drilling is successful, an environmental permit for the conversion often follows
to extraction location. Often an extraction plan is also submitted at the same time and the vote is taken

The minister almost always agrees with the maximum gas volumes and maximum number of extraction years. On field
Three additional drilling locations are planned in addition to the one in Wapse, but all
wells assessed independently of each other. While the drilling locations are not alone
increase, but are also close together. However, an overview map is missing and there
insufficient account is taken of the adverse effects that the locations have on each other
may have pointed this out to each other. The Mining Council pointed this out in July 2017
from the nearby Eesveen and Vinkega fields. Then the meaningful field is Diever, and the
planned expansion in this field should be included in the advice.
It is important to recognize that the damage that occurred in Groningen only occurred
became tangible and visible after decades of gas extraction or even after its termination
of it. The people of Groningen pay attention to their problems through great tenacity
got. The residents above/around the small fields do not want to be in the same situation
end up. But so far no confidence is justified that this will be okay
comes. It is great that the energy transition is being worked on; in that phase, in our opinion
the extraction of gas must only take place offshore. But as long as gas in the
small fields are extracted and damage to property may occur,
residents are entitled to guarantees with regard to a claim settlement
transparent, on time, and just like in Groningen, where the opposite will occur
burden of proof. In this light, it is convenient for Vermilion Energy to make the agreements
baseline measurements - postpone follow-up measurements and not communicate. It looks like
that companies and residents can already count on a decline in the value of real estate
Good.
Vermilion has a bb rating and insufficient reserves in its annual accounts to support it
for damage caused (source: Vermilion Energy annual accounts 2017). Suppose this company
withdraws, becomes bankrupt or is no longer liable for this for any other reason, then
We expect the government to guarantee such a claim settlement. How
Gas extraction is profitable when the actual damage to ecology, landscape and
real estate are included? Does this not make a company disproportionate in
benefit while the burden is passed on to residents?
Residents are also insufficiently positioned to cope with small fields
the play of forces with Vermilion Energy. The State has a duty of care
energy supply, but also a duty of care in providing sufficient safety and security
safeguarding nature and environmental values. That is why the State must provide guarantees and
it should not leave this to the interplay of forces between Vermilion Energy and residents, because
they don't have the position for that.
Our conclusions
Due to the opacity of the procedures surrounding gas extraction, due to the lack of
information, due to non-compliance on the part of Vermilion Energy,
due to the lack of a fair and transparent trade-off between economics
interest at national level and the many interests at regional and municipal level
there is no longer a legitimate and democratic process of decision-making.
Residents have a wide range of questions that have not yet been answered. We
please refer to the memo from the group 'No Opschudding Gaswinning
Eesveen' that was recently sent to you.
The government is currently making the gas extraction process possible for Vermilion Energy
far too much to control oneself. This is at the expense of the openness that is so important
is necessary in situations where others are the victims of gas extraction. That certainly applies
as long as there are no guarantees for a claim settlement. One's pleasures and all others'
the burdens, without them having any say in it, that is feudal and would be in the

Participation company desired by the government with a lot of responsibility for the
citizen, are no longer allowed.
Because of your duty of care, we urge you
* to ensure that this gas extraction process becomes transparent, and thus
more democratic;
* to ensure that the residents' insecurities are removed
through a clear policy with unambiguous principles;
* to ensure that all social costs of gas extraction are covered by the State
are passed on to the operator, so that an economically fair assessment can be made
exploitation arises.
Working group of residents' groups around the Diever field: GAS DrOvF
On their behalf

Henk Koene
chairman of Local Interest Vledderveen
localbelang@vledderveendrenthe.nl

Portfolio distribution by the Municipal Executive

Portfolio distribution by the Municipal Executive as of June 1, 2018

Mayor André van de Nadort Administration and administrative bodies Public order and security Lobbying and acquisition OWO cooperation Communication Local Media Automation and (documentary) information provision Legal Affairs Information security / GDPR Business parks Regional agenda Southeast Fryslân (primus) Wolvega shopping center (secundus) AB member Safety Region Fryslân Organized Consultation trade unions (secundus) Portfolio holder consultation Association of Frisian Municipalities Governance and Safety
Councilor Jack Jongebloed (VVD) also 1st deputy mayor Sports Agriculture Broadband Licensing, Supervision and Enforcement Land policy and municipal real estate Traffic and transport / roads Finances Coordination of village policy Lindewijk (secundus) World Heritage Colonies of Benevolence (primus) Regional agenda Southeast Fryslân (secundus) De Linde Area Committee Destination Noordwolde (secundus) Cycle path De Linde Improvement of Wolvega station area Approach/redevelopment De Blesse Quality level Public Space (secundus) Educational housing (secundus) Industrial estates (secundus) AB member FUMO AB member joint social employment scheme Fryslân (for the time being) Member AVA Caparis NV ( for the time being) Hûs en Hiem (alternate member AB) De Marrekrite (alternative member AB) Afvalsturing Friesland NV/ OMRIN (alternative member AGM) Portfolio holder consultation Association of Frisian Municipalities Finance Portfolio holder consultation Association Frisian Municipalities Sports
Councilor Hanneke Zonderland (CDA), also 2nd deputy mayor Elderly Social support Social work Welfare, training and development work Social cultural work Public health Area teams Environmental law / vision Building and housing Public housing
Monument care Sustainability, environment, climate adaptation Lindewijk (primus) De Linde area committee (secundus) Destination Noordwolde Safety Region (Health section) and as deputy member deputy mayor AB FUMO deputy member Member AB Hûs en Hiem Deputy member public lighting & energy cooperative Fryslân UA Portfolio holder consultation Association Frisian Municipalities Health and Welfare Portfolio Holders Consultation Association of Frisian Municipalities Spatial Planning, Living, Environment
Councilor Mariska Rikkers (WB), also 3rd deputy mayor Work and Income Youth Participation Act Poverty and debt assistance Circular economy Public space, sewerage and waste Playgrounds Public lighting Municipal cemetery Broadband (secundus) Improvement of Wolvega station area (secundus) Approach/redevelopment De Blesse (secundus) Quality level of public space (primus) Member OLAF Member General Meeting Shareholders Waste Management Friesland NV/ OMRIN Member of public lighting & energy cooperative Fryslân UA Portfolio holder consultation Association Frisian Municipalities Work and Income Portfolio holder consultation Association Frisian Municipalities Youth
Councilor Roelof Theun Hoen (VVD), also 4th deputy mayor Education Educational housing (primus) Art and Culture Music (education) Amateur art practice Multifunctional and welfare accommodations Public library Economic development Shopping center Wolvega (primus) Employment Regulation / deregulation Recreation and Tourism Personnel and organization Services World Heritage Colonies of Benevolence (secundus) Cycle path along the Linde (secundus) Organized consultation with trade unions (primus) AB member de Marrekrite Board member of the North Netherlands Board Academy Portfolio holder consultation Association of Frisian Municipalities Education Portfolio holder consultation Association Frisian Municipalities Economic Affairs, Recreation and Tourism Portfolio holder consultation Association Frisian Municipalities Culture
The mutual substitution is:

Jongebloed < -- > Rikkers Zonderland < -- > Hoen

Question time at council meeting

Q&A  04-12-2017

1. In the ''Leeuwarder Courant'' we could read that the Police (Northern Netherlands) would have to downsize.

Question to the council:

• What are the consequences of this for our municipality? We already have so few agents?
• Can the mayor inform us about what else has been agreed?

Answer :

The mayor is not responsible for the police and police strength, that is the job of the minister. The mayor can inform us that the three Northern provinces are above this according to the established strength. There will be a reduction through equal progression. It may not sound reasonable, but if a higher capacity is maintained here, capacity will have to be sacrificed elsewhere in the Netherlands. However, the mayor, who will join the Regional Police Consultation Office next year, will make every effort to maintain strength as much as possible.

2. Last Thursday evening a number of councilors attended local interest De Blesse.
Those present were very concerned about the future progress of the redevelopment of the Steenwijkerweg, Spoorlaan and Markeweg there. The PB board stated that it was in discussions with the municipality, but could not confirm its confidence in a successful outcome.

Questions for the council:

• What is the real state of affairs now?
• Is it on the investment calendar?
• Can more clarity be provided to the Council?

Answer :

councilor Jongebloed. As you know and report, the project has been registered on the investment calendar. At the beginning of next year, the council will come up with a proposal about this and then it will be up to the new council and the council which projects will be given priority.


3. We read in the newspaper that the Leeuwarden municipal council will meet on Wednesdays from January: municipal council meetings and committee meetings.

Question to the council:
  • Wouldn't this also be something for our community?

Answer :

Mr Bos/CDA, as chairman of the ''Administrative renewal'' working group, indicates that the evaluation of the meeting structures/the memo ''This is how the Weststellingwerf council does it!'' has started. This point can be made known in the evaluation by Mr Mulder.


4. There will be municipal elections in 3 1/5 months. We now hear that quite a few changes are in the pipeline. New rules; while we in the Council often talk about wanting fewer rules.

Question to the council:
  • Can we be informed and talk about this openly?
Answer :

The mayor indicates that everyone will be informed of the new procedures and rules in mid-January.


5. In the list of decisions regarding gas extraction, we would like to be informed about the permits previously granted by Vermillion.

Questions for the council:
  • Vermillion has adhered to the extraction of the number of m2 as agreed in all permits granted at the time. How is this checked?
  • We have also heard that Steenwijkerland and Westerveld have prepared a statement for the expansion of the Eesveen extraction site.
  • How far has our council reached the commitment made by the alderman?
Answer :

Alderman Trompetter indicates that the council will submit a view and forward it to the council.

6. Mr. Mulder list Mulder responds to the incoming document E-11, the letter from the griffio bus regarding daytime transport.

Answer :

Alderman Trompetter/Mayor Van de Nadort indicate that the council will be informed about the solution regarding the griffin bus

Press release

Discussion evening concept Environmental Vision


Wolvega, November 10, 2017

Since the spring of 2017, the municipality of Weststellingwerf has been working with its residents on an Environmental Vision. After six interactive inspiration and theme meetings, a draft vision has now been drawn up. This will be presented and tested on Wednesday, November 22, at the town hall in Wolvega.
The draft version of the Weststellingwerf Environmental Vision is the elaboration of six interactive evenings in which residents and stakeholders from, among others, the agricultural sector, villages, businesses and healthcare provided input for the future vision of Weststellingwerf. Urban planner Wim Keijsers from Bureau Nieuwe Gracht collected all input and processed it into the concept.
Discussion evening
The discussion evening will take place on Wednesday, November 22 from 7:00 PM in the town hall (Griffioenpark 1 in Wolvega) and is open to all interested parties. During this public and interactive evening we will discuss the main points of the draft Environmental Vision with all attendees.
Students De Heidepolle
Following the interactive evenings with residents and other stakeholders, a project was also carried out with children. Students from De Heidepolle primary school in Wolvega have started working on the Environmental Vision in their own way, they will show the result of their project this evening.
To register
You can register for the discussion evening by calling (0561) 691394 or sending an email to regiosvisie@weststellingwerf.nl. Anyone who registers will receive a summary of the concept a few days before the meeting.

MOTION Consent decision for amendment of Vinkega extraction plan

Wolvega :November 6, 2017
Proposal number: 2017-
Agenda item:
Subject: Consent decision for amendment of Vinkega extraction plan.

The council of the municipality of Weststellingwerf, meeting on November 6, 2017,

Taking note of:

The notification from the Ministry of Economic Affairs in the Stellingwerf of Wednesday, November 1, 2017 of the draft consent decree amendment to the Vinkega extraction plan, containing an amendment to the Vermillion extraction plan from the Vinkega 1 location, located on the Westvierdeparten in Vinkega in the municipality of Weststellingwerf, whereby Vermillion submits the request for: combining the description of the extraction method in the two gas-bearing reservoirs in an extraction plan, extending the extraction period, a (renewed) seismic risk analysis and an update of production and subsidence forecasts,

taking into account that:
1. Only persons or bodies that have submitted an opinion on the draft consent decision can later appeal against the consent decision to the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State,
2. The municipality of Weststellingwerf has not previously submitted an opinion on this.
3. The zoning plan for rural areas includes an article that consists of existinggas extraction locations no increase in gas extraction would take place;
4. That more gas appears to have been extracted in Drenthe by Vermillion than allowed:
5. The Mining Council understands from the request for advice that the municipality of Weststellingwerf
has indicated that it will not make use of its right to advice:
6. Views have been submitted by the Province of Drenthe, the Municipality of Westerveld,Drents Overijsselse Delta water board and wetterskip Fryslan.

the council requests:

To submit a written opinion on the draft consent decision for the amendment of the Vinkega extraction plan, containing the conditions and/or objections to which consent is given to the amendment of the Vermillion extraction plan from the Vinkega 1 location, located on the Westvierdeparten in Vinkega in the municipality of Weststellingwerf, as expressed in the adopted motion in the Weststellingwerf municipal council on November 6, 2017.
We also request that the council provide a copy of the written opinion to the council:
And proceeds to the order of the day.

On behalf of Lijst Mulder
Ton Mulder, November 6, 2017

Co-signed by: PvdA, Groen Links, Weststellingwerf Naturally

Share by: