Nantwich News: 10.December 2020
“Nantwich residents are facing a 42.5% rise in their Town Council tax base after councillors voted through a controversial budget plan. It means all properties facing a £1 per week increase in the town council portion of their bill from April 2021.”
“But not all councillors were in favour, with one blasting the budget which includes spending £16,000 on coffee machines for the Civic Hall.
The proposed budget sets out how the town council, which pays for essential services like town CCTV, the indoor market and Civic Hall, needs to raise more than £932,000 from households to balance the books. The authority has been hit badly by the Covid pandemic with the closure of the Civic Hall and market hall, two of its biggest revenue earners.
But Cllr John Statham (Conservative) told a heated town council meeting tonight that the finance committee had not done enough to find savings and that the rise would hit families who are already struggling. “As it stands I can’t support this Budget,” he said.
“The increases proposed here, residents would at least expect councillors to go through each line and make sure we find a way to reduce costs as much as we can. I don’t believe we have given it the scrutiny it deserves. An increase of 42.5% is not going to help people who are struggling.
“Effectively, we’ll be taking an extra £260,000 out of people’s pockets with this rise. If we’re not going to add £260,000 of value to the town for residents, we’re effectively just using it to cover a hole in the budget. Surely it’s better to have that money in people’s pockets to spend in the town?”
However, others said the budget was necessary as Cheshire East Council had reduced the amount it would give to the town council by £26,000.
External auditors have already warned the authority that it has a major shortfall in its “general reserves” which all councils should retain for emergencies.
Cllr Arthur Moran (Independent) backed the budget, but in an extraordinary statement, claimed those “...councillors who don’t live in the town council boundary should not be voting against it”.
He added: “The Council Tax base has been reduced by Cheshire East Council, the general reserves we have are not enough, and we are living in extraordinary times and had no income from the Civic Hall.
“We need to keep this council financially viable and to protect jobs of our staff.”
Cllr David Marren (Independent) also backed the Budget, adding: “I think if we don’t put this Budget through it is a vote of no confidence in the clerk and I shall be voting for a £1 a week increase. The clerk has stripped everything out that can be.”
Councillors voted four proposals through narrowly with seven voting in agreement and five abstaining, including backing the proposed budget for 2021-22, approving the precept, and noting the capital reserves and revenue reserves.”
Speaking today, Cllr Statham expressed his concerns about both the tenor of the meeting and the decision made.
“I did not support this budget. I understand the financial difficulties that the council (and of course everyone else) is facing resulting from the impact of the restrictions and accept that some sort of rise was probably inevitable.
Tax payers will expect that councillors looked at this budget in detail to find savings where possible to reduce the impact on the tax payer. In my opinion, this didn't happen.
I suggested that the budget was sent back to the Finance Committee for another look to see if we could identify any savings but this was quickly rejected by 'independent' councillors who seemingly wanted to pass the budget as quickly as possible.
Not one line of spending was reduced. Can we honestly say that the Town Council is running at 100% efficiency and every penny is well spent? If so, it will be the only organisation in the world able to manage that. Quite a feat!
Any dissenters were accused of having no faith in the Town Clerk. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Clerk and her team are doing a fantastic job in very turbulent times.
I will continue to scrutinise all spending, as I was elected to do, despite what they say. There was significant scope to save money next year and keep the tax increase to a minimum but the opportunity to do this was wasted and when I queried this, it was quickly closed down.
Some examples of spending which could be taken out or delayed:
- Recruitment of Town Ranger - £27k
- Staffing Review - £20k
- Newsletter - £10k
- Civic Ceremonies - £2k
- Mayors Allowance - £2k
- Regalia & Refreshments - £2.3k
- New equipment at Civic Hall - £32.5k including £16k for a coffee machine.
That's £96k quickly saved without a reduction in services. If only we had taken the opportunity to look at this again as I suggested, we could have reduced the impact on families who are already struggling with reduced hours and potential job losses on the horizon.
A few people have asked me why I abstained on the vote. I believe that we should vote either 'Yes' or 'No' and do what we were elected to do. However, in this case some of the 'independent' councillors inferred that by voting against this budget it would be a "vote of no confidence" in the clerk. I believe that was an irresponsible thing to do, to bring paid impartial staff into the debate like that. As I said above, I have complete confidence in the council officers but that should not stop us in our duty to scrutinise the budgets. That's our job and what we we're elected to do.”
(Cllrs John Statham, Peter Groves, Andrew Martin and Philip Staley abstained from the vote).
