Since my last report there has not been a full cycle of Committee meetings; the last Cabinet meeting was Thursday Feb 21 followed by the Council meeting March 7

At the Cabinet Meeting on Thursday Jan 17 the Cabinet discussed car parking charges. Proposals for ending the 2hr free parking scheme in Southwell were withdrawn after our local campaign against the Conservative’s plans to end free parking in the town centre. Interestingly the Cabinet agreed to discuss the future management of the Southwell Car Parks with the Town Council. The Cabinet agreed to implement a residents’ parking scheme in King Street Car Park, although, astonishingly, weeks later the exact details of the scheme has still not been notified to residents.

At the Council meeting the budget was agreed. Oddly, no alternative budget was proposed by Labour even though they voted against the Council Tax. It appears, but they were too frightened to say so, that they wanted to increase the Tax at Kelham Hall, just like they proposed at County Hall. Labour wanted a 3% increase which we opposed.

I raised the question of the budgeted loss of £31k on Southwell Market under the current regime. We also noted that the Car Parks lose the District Council £26k a year. Although the Council has not agreed to increase the budget for opening the toilets in Southwell, it has increased the costs for other toilets in Newark by £9k a year. Civic expenses have also increased by 33% this year. Costs of CCTV have fallen from £202k to £170k a 16% fall, greater than the donation given to the District by the Town Council for CCTV in the town.

In the Budget the Town’s precept was noted. Some year’s ago Southwell’s precept was the 4th highest in the District. This year it has fallen to 17th and is now lower than every other town but also a significant number of smaller villages such as Farndon, Lowdham and Gunthorpe. For the first time, the tax for the Police now exceeds the District’s levy. The Labour Police Commissioner has raised the tax by 1.95% – the maximum he could get away with without a referendum – perhaps he was frightened that he would lose!

As the budget set the overall Council Tax but individual budget lines will be subject to the new Committee structure’s over view – and will probably be altered by decisions in these Committees, we voted to support the budget and consequent Council Tax.

I raised a question on the Neighbourhood Plan funding – as Bridge ward in Newark was identified as a ‘front runner’ for Neighbourhood Planning. However, it is not proceeding to a Neighbourhood Plan, and the unused funds from the front runner grant are available for other Neighbourhood Plans in the District. The DCLG are pursuing this matter.

As previously suggested, the Council also approved its move to Committees from May. There will be one small Policy Committee – and three ‘service’ Committees, although the names of these are still being debated by some Councillors.

Julian Hamilton and I also drew attention once again to the apparent unfairness of the Benefit under-occupation subsidy for Council houses. Benefits will be reduced if tenants occupy Council House accommodation which has additional rooms free, irrespective of whether alternative accommodation has been offered. Also that the overall reduction in benefits due to the method of payment via Local Councils has in other districts been offset by other sources of income such as increases on council tax income from empty houses but not in this area despite the clearly identifiable poverty in certain localities of the district being largely dependent on such payments. We raised this potential off set earlier in the year, but this was rejected by Cabinet members.

Residents may have seen the announcement of the new catering Contract for Kelham Hall. The contract will lead to a significant number of rooms in the Gilbert Scott building being used exclusively by the contractor for his wedding and conference business. This may lead to more of the building being leased to the contractor in future. The Council will contract into the 1903’s extension, and plans for this move from Apr 1 are being implemented. Some larger public meetings will still be held in the Carriage Court as usual.

I will report on future developments here

 

   Leave a comment