Parish Council votes to increase precept by 50%

DSCN1559

Alderley Edge Parish Council agreed at their meeting on Monday, 11th January, to increase the precept for the next financial year by 50% to cover the cost of running the Medical Centre and Festival Hall in the short term.

Councillors voted to increase the precept, the part of your council tax which is charged by the Parish Council, for 2016/17 from £120,000 to £180,000. This is equivalent to an increase of just under £2 per month for a Band D property.

Councillor Myles Garbett explained "2015 has been a busy year with a lot of capital expenditure and undertaking of debt. Whilst the long term investment will be positive, the short to medium term cash flow projections show that, without intervention now, the Parish Council will go into the red within 5 years. This is primarily due to the loan repayments and running costs for the Festival Hall and Medical Centre outweighing their income in the short term.

"Thereafter, 6 years onwards, the picture becomes more positive with our forecasts showing a good excess as loan repayments come down and rental income goes up. To this end we propose to increase the precept from £120,000 to £180,000 - a 50% increase. In real terms this equates to a little under £2 additional per month on Council Tax on a Band D house."

He continued "The second floor of the Medical Centre does not yet have identified tenants so, when let, this will improve income projections. With the nearly refurbished Festival Hall not yet fully operational revenue projections for this are set conservatively within the budget and the cash flow forecast, though both still up from previous years. We shall be monitoring the Festival Hall performance closely and shall look to review projections further.

"The envisaged parking project only features quite modestly, with £7,000 allocated, as we are only able at this point to account for public consultation and professional fees in progressing any submissions to planning. Any further capital expenditure would only be brought to the table when a fully costed, funded and viable proposal was available.

"We have also allocated £10,000 to the Neighbourhood Plan - subject to going live with that project."

Councillor Geoff Hall, Chairman of Alderley Edge Parish Council said "No one on the Council wants to increase the precept, even by the relatively modest sum of £2 per month, and I hope that we shall be able to bring it back down again in future years once we have a clearer view of the finances relating to running the Medical Centre and the Festival Hall".

He went on to say "The Parish Council precept has been stable in recent years, but, looking back at my own bills, I can see it went up by 71% in 2010/11 and then back down by 26% the following year. I hope that residents will understand the need for us to manage the finances cautiously. No one, I am sure, will thank us if we later run out of money because we did not take action now. The coming years have many uncertainties and we need to ensure we are as prepared as we can be for them."

Tags:
Alderley Edge Medical Centre, Alderley Edge Parish Council, Festival Hall, Precept
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments

Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.

Fenton Simpson
Wednesday 13th January 2016 at 5:32 pm
A reasonable rise given the circumstances. I'd like to know what the increase was for in 2010/11?
Vin Sumner
Wednesday 13th January 2016 at 10:56 pm
I am getting quite concerned about the role of the PC ( of any colour ) in investing and taking risk on capital projects. Is this what it should be doing ? Just wondering ?
Fenton Simpson
Wednesday 13th January 2016 at 11:36 pm
Hi Vin

I believe they are trying to rescue the massive project of the medical centre / festival hall. A project that is unique for a parish council to manage in the UK.

But I have more confidence in the new PC to sort this out than the previous PC who set this project in motion with very poor planning in place.
Vin Sumner
Thursday 14th January 2016 at 9:43 am
Fenton , think the uniqueness is my worry :-) Vin
Duncan Herald
Thursday 14th January 2016 at 2:27 pm
Fenton,
don't you think it is best to keep the two projects seperate; the Medical centre is so much the mor eimportant. Wrangle about how much has been spent on the F. Hall by all means but leave the Med. Centre alone.
DELETED ACCOUNT False Name (Louise Gray)
Thursday 14th January 2016 at 7:18 pm
Hello having "lurked"on this site for a few years I now feel the need to comment. I have lived in this great village for 15 years and seen many changes and not all good. However the change in the make up of the PC has not been great IMHO. Whilst individual Councillors are lovely (I am sure) I am afraid it is a vote of "no confidence" from me in their steering a new course for the Village. I resolutely believe that the old PC would not have put the precept up by a staggering 50% (Yes it DID go up by 74% a few years ago but that was a one off event. A friend of mine spoke to Mr Keegan at the time and was assured that it would go down the following year and he was as good as his word). The new PC have given us no such assurances and it looks like staying at 50% or even higher in years to come. I find it very alarming that our Parish Precept will be right up there with some of the highest in the country! The figures are publicly available for all to see. Furthermire we look like losing the main Council Tax Freeze also. Whilst many may see a £3.00 a month precept increase as a drop in the ocean believe me as a working Mum of a young family it is not. We are not all Footballers, Lawyers and CEO's living in this village. I have held on to my modestly paid job by the skin of my teeth during this recession and back in 2005 (way before the Crash) had to take a pay freeze owing to Company restructuring. I have been on this freeze for 11 years and we just get on with it. So yes Parish Council of "rainbow hues" and promising us a "new dawn" (or was that Blair) that £3 quid a month WILL hurt a lot. But that is ok whilst huge new mansions get knocked down, dug up and rebuilt in the village are on a nil Council Tax Band as the owners/developers profit. (Oh and these guys monopolise an awful lot of parking too in the village, but that is for the other thread!)
Ruth Norbury
Thursday 14th January 2016 at 10:49 pm
Vin, I completely agree with you. Not an appropriate job for a Parish Council. However we are doing the best we can with what we inherited.
Fenton Simpson
Friday 15th January 2016 at 5:33 pm
Louise no one wants to pay anymore tax than is nessary but what was the one off hike for in the past ? I don't know. But I can see why this new increase is required.

I'm not a footballer, lawyer or CEO.

If there is any blame here it should to be attributed then to the very questionable financial figures that Frank Keegan was responsible for as chairman of the finance committee regarding this medical centre and festival hall project.
DELETED ACCOUNT False Name (Louise Gray)
Friday 15th January 2016 at 7:03 pm
Thanks for the response Fenton. But why is our PC not claiming it's share of scetion 23 payments paid for by developers in the Village when granted planning permits instead of coming to the residents? We are not a "Cash Cow" I appreciate the transparency, but I do not believe they have a correct handle on the accounts. This £3 a month is not a "one off" like last time it looks set in stone for the next few years also. It could go up even higher. There are a lot of variables at play. Furthermore I do not think it acceptable to be living in a village with one of the highest precepts in the country. The previous councillors were fairly unfairly maligned on these forums. We may well be digging up part of Heyes Lane allotments and will the current PC be subjected to the same level of unfair abuse when they make the brave decision?. I suspect a lot of the mudslinging came from those who will always see the Tories as the "nasty" party and nothing would change their minds.
Fenton Simpson
Friday 15th January 2016 at 7:23 pm
I would like to add that I'm sure Frank thought he was doing the best for the village but this project was getting out of hand and spiralling out of control.

Post election and nine months on, I'd like to thank Frank for his public service to the PC and CE.

I'm certainly no friend and we clashed on this web site many times but I wish him well for the future.

But time moves on and we need to secure the future of the festival hall, parks(we have more than one) and allotments for future generations. We don't own these assets we are custodians only in the present.
Fenton Simpson
Friday 15th January 2016 at 9:45 pm
Hi Louise, from last nights meeting it was mentioned that we cannot claim the section 23 money, reason I'm not sure, but I'm happy to find out as I think we should be getting this from CE.

I don't know why you believe the increase will be set in stone or go higher as the current PC has not said this so it's purely speculation on your part?

As for the nasty party bit, ive voted conservative most of my life but the treatment I've been subjected to, and seen other members of the public, in conservative parish council meetings along with posting on here meant that they were pretty much wiped out in May's election.

Party politics on a parish council ? Leave it to the big boys and girls at Westminster. Lets sort out our local problems with out con, lab, lib point scoring.
DELETED ACCOUNT False Name (Louise Gray)
Friday 15th January 2016 at 11:50 pm
Well Fenton thanks for answering that query ref the section 23 payments. I appreciate it and I too would really like a reason as to why they may not use it, as surely it is intended for use within OUR village. Re the Precept rise I acknowledge that apart from this year's rise it has not been set in stone. It is just the lack of assurance on following years. As I said Mr Keegan assured us back in 2011 the big hike was a one off at the time and it really did come down afterwards. It was tough but believe me his reassurance went some way to alleviate this also we had our first major Council Tax freeze that year so it too offset it a little . The uncertainty for the next few years is what I find worrying and as I say this is what motivated me to join these forums. I wish you a very good night and do enjoy the debate jousting.
Graham Nicholson
Tuesday 19th January 2016 at 4:23 pm
I'm surprised people suggest the Parish Council shouldn't take on capital projects of any scale. This is a village blessed with many capable residents and by most standards is comfortably off. Surely we should practice some self-reliance and ambition. If the Parish Council doesn't identify opportunities to improve the village and to tackle its challenges - such as parking, the need for a decent medical centre and a revamp of the dated community hall - then what is the Parish Council for exactly?
Craig Browne
Tuesday 19th January 2016 at 5:38 pm
Dear Fenton/Louise,

With regard to "Section 23" (perhaps you mean Section 106 - these are the agreements signed between developers and Cheshire East?) there are five schemes relating to Alderley Edge; however, the monies are not simply available for the Parish Council to use as they see fit, rather they have to be used for a specific purpose as set out in each agreement. There are five schemes in Alderley Edge, all of which have been in place for some considerable time and remain unspent (perhaps as a result of the fact that they are so specific):

2a (Highways & Transport) - £59,283 towards the development and improvement of pedestrian, cycle or public transport access;

266a (Streets & Open Spaces) - £21,178 towards the improvement or enhancement of existing public open space facilities at Alderley Edge Playing Fields (Park) and Chorley Hall Lane;

266b (Streets & Open Spaces) - £40,083 towards recreation/outdoor sports facilities and supporting infrastructure at Alderley Edge Playing Fields (Park) and Chorley Hall Lane;

274 (Streets & Open Spaces) - £40,083 towards the development, improvement and enhancement of open space and amenity land at Alderley Edge Playing Fields (Park), Heyes Lane Allotments & Chorley Hall Playing Fields.

221 (Housing) - £87,500 towards the provision of affordable housing in a rural area to be determined by Cheshire East Council.

Historically, neither Ward Councillors nor Parish Councils were given much opportunity to become involved in the negotiation of these agreements. Many other CEC Councillors feel this was wrong and I am currently involved in a Scrutiny Committee Task & Finish Group, which is looking at how this can be improved upon in future. As things stand, Parish Councils have no direct right of access to these funds, as they have to be spent by the recognised legal signatory to the agreements (i.e. Cheshire East Council).

As your Cheshire East Ward Councillor, I have asked and had it confirmed by the Section 106 Officer, that none of the above schemes could be tapped into to help fund a car park at Heyes Lane; however, it remains a possibility that 266a, 266b & 274 could be used to help fund one at Chorley Hall Lane. Without prejudice to the consultation exercise that is currently being carried out, I will continue to chase up whether this is in fact possible.

Best wishes,
Craig
DELETED ACCOUNT False Name (Louise Gray)
Tuesday 19th January 2016 at 11:07 pm
Hello Craig. Thanks for the very thorough response. ( I have been on a train for the last few hours, back from a long day in London and haven't been able to respond till now). Thanks also for putting me right on the section 106 payments, ( I don't know why I christened them section 23 ;) ) . If they cannot be allocated to the items described in the clause, can Cheshire East take back the money? Is there a time limit for spending a allocating the money? It seems perverse that developers (quite rightly) pay into section 26 as part of the planning conditions to benefit the village, when these same developers and their workforce need multiple parking spaces and we cannot use that same money to provide for a car park. Thanks for providing the facts and also for your hard work in chasing up answers to the questions on our behalf, It is much appreciated.
Duncan Herald
Wednesday 20th January 2016 at 10:00 am
Hi Louise,
Section 106 has a new name now.

Hi Craig,
are there plans to grab the monies allocated to the park? If so, how shall it be decided on what to spend it?

As to sources of money: the Business Rates are (as I understand it) no longer sent off to Westminster. Instead our noble Chancellor has made it possible for local authorities to keep their business rates. Does that mean that C.E. are now trousering all that dosh? If so, can we not screw the A.E. business rates out of C.E. and spend then where they were generated?