Budget = Cuts

Council bosses say increasing income and prioritising "core services" will be their focus as they battle with another cut in government grants. Parking charges will rise and the district's share of council tax will go up by the maximum two per cent allowed (unless a local referendum takes place) as officials try to balance Canterbury City Council's (CCC) budget.

The authority must slash £5.5 million by 2017-18, in addition to £4 million already found through savings from schemes including shutting Herne Bay, Whitstable and Canterbury Heritage museums for winter.

Although the amount of central Government grant to be awarded will not be formally announced until next month, CCC expects a cut of 13 per cent for 2014-15 – a reduction of £1.3 million from £10.2million to £8.9 million.

For the year 2015-16 the authority expects a further reduction of 16 per cent, taking the grant down to £7.5 million. Additional reductions are forecast at nine per cent for 2016-17 and ten per cent for 2017-18.

Council services have been ranked in order of importance to help work out where money should be spent and where savings can be made, but city council chief executive Colin Carmichael warned tough decisions lie ahead. He said:

"It is a very significant reduction and we can't just carry on doing things the same way. We have to work out what our core business is. There is no way to just carry on squeezing everything and trying to find the extra savings. It will not work. Within the next few years, councillors have to make a decision on what we won't do any more."

Consultation on the new proposals will start after they have been discussed by members of the council's ruling executive committee tonight (Thursday 7th Nov). They include raising parking charges in some city centre car parks by 20p an hour, and increasing the authority's proportion of the council tax by two per cent, or about 7p a week for a Band D property. The hike would bring in an extra £170,000 a year.

Officials can boost income by making sure planned new homes are built, earning a portion of the Government's new homes bonus. There is also rental income from Whitefriars shopping centre and other property, including the Military Road offices left empty by staff cuts. But Mr Carmichael warned that services would be affected:

"If people care enough about their local services they will get involved and they can find different ways of doing things. It has already worked with the Westgate Hall and it could work elsewhere. We also need managers within the council to come up with creative ways to reduce costs and increase income."

No large-scale redundancy programme is planned, but vacant posts may not be filled and each department will continue to be reviewed. Each service has been set a 20 per cent savings target between now and 2016. Cuts could also be made to the civic office, with the Lord Mayor undertaking fewer engagements. The council may also now charge for any house or street renaming services. Council leader John Gilbey said:

"The world of local government funding has now changed forever. We have to accept that there is less money available."

thisiskent 7th November 2013

Beach hut owners to start paying market rent

Canterbury City Council is seeking views on future charging arrangements for beach huts. Ongoing tenancy negotiations with Beach Hut Owners' Associations prompted the council to seek external legal advice on its position. As a result, a number of changes are being made to beach hut tenancies and the associated fees.

The council's barrister provided very clear legal advice that it is obliged to run its beach huts on a commercial basis and charge a market rent at the earliest opportunity – which is when the new tenancy agreement comes in to effect on 1 April 2014. Otherwise the council would not be acting in the best interest of general tax payers living in the district.

Operating commercially means that the council can no longer offer a reduced rate to residents of Canterbury district compared to non-residents, or offer the long term discount to owners who have had a hut for more than 15 years.

The council must also stop charging hut owners a 'supplementary rental fee' of five times annual rent should they sell their hut. This had been applied to try and keep annual rents down. However, instead of applying this charge (of anywhere between £1,380 and £1,840), the council will now only charge an administration fee of £463 to hut vendors to cover staff costs.

To ensure that the market rent is set fairly and independently, the council appointed an external valuation office to make that assessment. This work was carried out for the council by DVS, who operate on behalf of HM Customs and Revenue and who used rent levels at over 50 other comparative sites, amongst other information, to calculate the market value.

So pretty, so welcoming.

The current 2013/14 fees are £276 in Herne Bay and £368 in Tankerton per year. Subletting is not currently allowed and the cost of selling a hut is between £1380 and £1840.

DVS have advised that for 2013/14, the annual market rent for Herne Bay should be £475 and Tankerton should be £650 – payable by all hut owners. If subletting is allowed, the market rent increases by 20%. However, the cost of selling a hut would be reduced to £463.

The council is aware that the annual increases will be difficult for some beach hut owners. To help make this easier, the council is considering applying the move to market rents over the maximum acceptable period of two years – views on this are being sought as part of the consultation.

The consultation is also asking for views on the market rent set by DVS and whether sub-letting should be allowed or not. The matter will be considered by the Overview and Executive committees in December.

Chief Executive Colin Carmichael said:

"Having received the barrister's clear advice, the council has a statutory duty to comply."

Executive member for foreshore services, Cllr Peter Vickery-Jones, said:

"I am genuinely unhappy that we are having to put these proposals forward. We are mindful of how difficult this will be for some beach hut owners and we have done our level best to lessen the impact as much as possible.

However, we are obliged to take note of the advice given and I hope that owners will understand our position. I am keenly interested to hear responses to the consultation and these will be seriously considered in our debate."

More information and details about how to respond to the consultation can be found HERE.

CCC website

Council's priorities not secret, not confidential, just rubbish

The city council has finally published its league table of services as it lays the ground for further budget cuts and savings.

It has put the controversial Local Plan, in which more than 15,000 new homes are planned for the district, atop the pile, with the cost of running democracy second and development management third.

Culture in Canterbury also features highly with the Marlowe Theatre at five out of 70, the Beaney at seven and the Roman Museum at 21. Meanwhile, rubbish collections are ranked 28 and public toilets are 53.

The lowest scored services were elections, archives and the council's obligations under the Freedom of Information Act.

Executive members and senior officers drew up the table as the council prepares to lose 45% of its income by 2017.

It means certain services and staff will face the axe. Mr Carmichael will go into greater details with officers at the staff conference on November 14. In his letter to council workers, chief executive Colin Carmichael said:

"All this information is being used in our star chambers to think about whether we need to continue to deliver these services and, if we do, whether to do so at the current cost level."

The table was created by rating each service out of 10 against each of the council's 10 pledges on its corporate plan. These have titles such as economy, safety, homes, culture, health and well-being, and young people.

Questions may be asked about those ratings after the Marlowe Theatre received 4/10 for health and well-being and the mayor's office received 3/10 in every single category, including housing, safety and protecting the environment.

The Conservative controlled authority came under fire earlier in the year after it created the list but refused to let anyone see it.

Cllr Alex Perkins, the leader of the opposition Lib Dem group, believes the people of the district should have been allowed to rate the services they use. He said:

"If the council are going to determine funding according to a league table of priorities then they should be local residents' priorities. not council leader John Gilbey's. Why don't the council ask people to give their own scores and actually prioritise what local residents want for a change."

The league table is published in the agenda for the executive meeting at the Guildhall tonight (7th November).

HB Gazette 7th November 2013

HBM

Council Priorities: where will the axe fall?

about 10 years ago

The Council's priorities. Theirs, not ours.

about 10 years ago

Council's priorities not secret, not confidential, just rubbish

about 10 years ago

Council's priorities aren't secret - they're confidential!

about 10 years ago

Our Council's secret priorities

about 10 years ago

Our Council's secret priorities

Oh dear... the Council that represents us and works for us is refusing to tell us what they're doing. It's a kind of nanny-dictator state. 

---

Canterbury City Council has produced a league table of its 71 service areas in order of importance, but is refusing to reveal how it has ranked them. The Gazette has learned that the Marlowe Theatre is fifth in the league table while bin collections - a service delivered to every home in the district is 29th.

Senior officers and councillors spent hours in meetings scoring the service areas according to the council's priorities and rated each one against its 10-pledge corporate plan.

Colin Carmichael, the chief executive of the Conservative-controlled council, says he is determined to keep the league table a secret until the next budget is published later in the year.

"This is the first time that we have actually taken a step back and asked questions about everything that we do. But I can't let people see it because we are only half through."

The league table was compiled as the council assesses the way it will run its services in future. lt is steeling itself for a 50% drop in income by 2017.

Members of the ruling executive injected their political priorities into the rankings which could be used to cut some council services completely as the drive to save money intensifies in the coming years.

Asked why the Marlowe scored so much higher than bin collections, Mr Carmichael said the theatre "ticked several boxes" on the corporate plan pledges.  He said:

"Refuse collection, for example, scores mid-range at 29th on the priority list as it scores highly against only two of the 10 pledges, but it is a top political priority and it is a statutory service. The Marlowe can be seen to fulfil more pledges. It is important economically for us as we didn't want that end of the city to lose out with the building of the Whitefriars shopping area."

Lib Dem group leader Alex Perkins is furious at the decision to keep the league table secret.

"Presumably, they'll only show people when they've made all their decisions.  Here we are yet again with the council taking decisions with public money on the basis of its own political agenda and refusing the public the right to know how it is ranking services. If that's not a sign of how the council is going to hell in a handcart, then I don't know what is.

HB Gazette 10th October 2013

View fullsize

HBM

Council Priorities: where will the axe fall?

about 10 years ago

The Council's priorities. Theirs, not ours.

about 10 years ago

Council's priorities not secret, not confidential, just rubbish

about 10 years ago

Council's priorities aren't secret - they're confidential!

about 10 years ago

Our Council's secret priorities

about 10 years ago

Local Plan: Canterbury businesses invited to discuss future plan

Businesses can discuss the city council's draft local plan at C4B's Annual Conference on June 28th.

The plan outlines proposals for development over the next 20 years. It is available online now for public consultation.

Colin Carmichael, chief executive of Canterbury City Council business, will be presenting the plan and explaining its effects on local business in the area.

The conference, which is free, takes place at Augustine House in Canterbury from 8am to 10.30am, and includes breakfast.

To reserve a place, e-mail paul.spree@canterbury.gov.uk

HB Times 20th Jun 2013

Local Plan: the vision for 2031

Multimillion-pound plans to build 15,600 homes and transform roads "will support 6,500 new jobs across the district by 2031".

Canterbury City Council's draft Local Plan seeks to change roads in areas including Sturry and south Canterbury and create a new park-and-ride site close to a new A2 junction near Bridge.

The document, which is due to go out for public consultation from June 14 [actually June 20th], earmarks eight major sites of development in Canterbury, Herne Bay, Whitstable, Sturry and Hersden, with house-building and employment land suggestions for additional areas including Howe Barracks, and the current council office site.

The scheme will mean 9,916 new properties in addition to some 4,500 already in the pipeline or expected to be applied for, being built at a rate of some 780 per year, and 96,775 square metres of employment land being created in the next 17 years.

Proposals

Proposals include 4,000 homes, two primary schools, business space, allotments, shops and a medical centre in south Canterbury, which will also benefit from a £20 million junction on the A2 opposite Renville Farm and the relocated and extended park and ride on agricultural land close to the new junction.

Sturry and Broadoak will have a build of 1,000 homes, business units, community facilities and a £12 million bridge over the level crossing, which will be closed, bringing cars out at the park and ride.

CCC chief executive Colin Carmichael said:

"We have had lots of conversations with KCC and highways and in principle they are happy with this. The crossing will be closed and with traffic from Thanet and Herne Bay being diverted this will entirely change the character of Sturry."

Four hundred homes and an extension of the Duncan Downs village green, which will be doubled in size, and allotments are planned along the Thanet Way at Whitstable, another 1,000 homes, doctors surgery and 33,000 square metres of business space at the Altira site at Hillborough, and another 600 homes in Greenhill, near Briary school.

Strode Farm is earmarked for 800 homes, retail, employment and leisure space and a new relief road. The Herne Bay golf club site will get 400 homes, a doctors surgery, care home and leisure facilities. Hersden could get 800 homes, employment space, a community building and games area.

A new retail park is planned for Wincheap, and Howe Barracks could offer some limited development opportunities of up to 400 homes. The Ministry of Defence is understood to be selling the land next year.

CCC is also suggesting an Eastern bypass to run from the new Sturry bridge to the new A2 junction at Bridge. Government funding would be applied for to help with the costs.

Council leader John Gilbey said:

"This is a unique opportunity to get the relief road established even though we can't afford to build it right now."

The aim of the housing plan is to provide at least 30 per cent of the properties as affordable homes for families in the district and to try and keep graduating students who could add to the economy.

It is hoped the homes will also be used by the growing "knowledge" sector in Canterbury, made up of software and IT firms and professionals such as architects and accountants.

The district has seen jobs growth in this area despite the recession of around 36 per cent. Cllr Gilbey said:

"The knowledge sector, such as scientific, research and professional services, is a strong area. Our innovation centre is 95 per cent full and we could do with another one. There are incubation firms for hi-tech industries at the universities and we want to keep these people here."

The draft plan, which will be discussed by an overview committee at CCC on Monday 13th May, will go out for consultation for eight weeks [now 10 weeks]. People will be able to see copies at libraries and online. There may also be roadshows in the district.

It is expected the plan will be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate in Summer/Autumn 2014. The independent inspector will make the final decision on whether the plan is viable. For more information, see the plan at http://tinyurl.com/CantLocPlan

HB Times 9th May 2013

Election count delayed after vials found in ballot box

Deputy returning officer Colin Carmichael with officers at the Kings Hall

POLICE were called to the election count after two vials were found in a ballot box.

The discovery, in a box from St Andrew's Church Hall in Grimshill Road, Whitstable, meant the count for Whitstable was delayed for three hours.

Officials could not identify the yellow-orange liquid in the vials – which were wrapped in a ballot paper – and handed out gloves to the counters as a precaution.

Deputy returning officer Colin Carmichael said:

"We have to be sure we are doing the right thing. We are fairly sure they are harmless but until the police arrive to confirm that we cannot verify the votes in that box."

Once police arrived on the scene they instructed Mr Carmichael to advise reporters to leave the room – but there was no advice for candidates, agents or official observers, or for counters. After some refused – including Times staff – officers moved the vials to the bar at the Kings Hall.

After examining the boxes and the papers in them, they were declared safe and the counting could begin, three hours later than planned.

Jonathan Elliott, 47, of Sydney Road, Whitstable, was charged with tampering with nomination papers after two vials of liquid were found in a ballot box in Herne Bay.

He appeared before Channel Magistrates in Dover on Saturday and the case was adjourned until later this month.

thisiskent 9th May 2013

Will you be able to vote on election day?

Hundreds of people in the Canterbury district could miss their chance to vote in local elections this May if they don’t take action to register now.

Electoral Registration Officer Colin Carmichael said:

“Thursday 2 May is the chance for residents to have their say at the Kent County Council elections and a by-election for the Seasalter ward of the city council. We want everyone who is eligible to vote to be able to do so. Anyone who has moved house in the past few months needs to register with their new address. We’re also keen for anyone turning 18 on or before 2 May to make sure they are registered, so that they can vote for the first time.”

The deadline to register is Wednesday 17 April. Call 01227 862 007 to order a registration form, or you can print one off from www.aboutmyvote.co.uk .

Samantha Mills, Head of Campaigns at the Electoral Commission, the independent elections watchdog, said:

“If you are going to be away, you can ask to vote by post, or by proxy. More details about how to do this are at www.aboutmyvote.co.uk . It’s your vote, so don’t lose this chance to use it.”

The deadline to apply for a postal vote is 5pm on Wednesday 17 April, and for a proxy vote, it is 5pm on Wednesday 24 April.

CCC 22nd Mar 2013

Deferral on Kingsmead land decision

Excellent news - Kingsmead has won a brief reprieve, thanks to the sheer number of written objections, and the huge support for the online petition.

---

Discussion by Executive members of council proposals to appropriate land at Kingsmead for planning purposes has been deferred until the meeting on Thursday 21 June.

Originally the Executive was due to consider the plan at its meeting on 31st May.

However, the council received 246 comments during the appropriation public consultation, many of them containing detailed information. Therefore, the council has decided to defer a decision to allow for full analysis of all the issues raised. Council Leader Cllr John Gilbey said:

“This is an issue that has caused concern locally. We do not want to make a rushed decision and miss something important, so deferring for a meeting will mean we can give this full consideration.”

Additionally, the e-petition created on the council website by local people who oppose appropriation of the land has now passed 1,500 names. Reaching this figure automatically triggers a discussion at the council’s Overview Committee, and this has been scheduled for Wednesday 13 June.

The initiator of the petition will be allowed to ask a number of questions in advance, and the background to the issue and answers to the questions will be provided in a report that councillors will then discuss. Arrangements for this are being put in place at the moment.

CCC 28th May 2012

---

---

Schoolchildren Orla Lineham Fox and Timmy Pettman took on the might of the city council in a battle to save their playing field. The pupils from St Stephen's Junior School stood in front of the Canterbury Area Members Panel on last Monday night at the city's Guildhall in a last-ditch bid to save Kingsmead Field from being used for housing. Orla, 10, told the meeting:

"It's not just for me and my friends but for all the people of the area who live and breathe better because there is a lovely empty green field nearby."

Timmy, 11, added:

"Often in the evenings, I go to the field and play football with my dad and brother. It's very easy to stay indoors and watch TV or play computer games. Please leave our field alone."

Labour councillor Alan Baldock (Northgate Ward) said:

"The passion of the campaigners is phenomenal. It shows they really care and have realised the council has been a little bit sneaky. They have inspired these two children to become involved in local politics. If we lose this space, how can we trust a judgment made in similar circumstances again?"

Liberal Democrat leader Councillor Alex Perkins Tweeted the following day:

"Very impressed by the two brilliant young people who so professionally addressed Canterbury Council last night."

At the stormy meeting, residents accused the council of not consulting them – but council chief executive Colin Carmichael said consultation was carried out in 2004 when a primary school was planned for the site. The plans fell through when Kent County Council pulled out of the scheme and the land was earmarked for housing instead. He insisted that the decision had already been made by the council's executive but the move had to be rubber-stamped at the end of this month.

Residents have organised an e-petition – which has already attracted 1,603 signatures – on the council's own website. The petition closes Friday 25th May but has already been signed by enough people to force a debate by the council's overview committee. The 16 city and county councillors voted unanimously to send the plans to the committee for debate, effectively delaying the scheme.

County councillor Graham Gibbens (Canterbury City North East) demanded a fresh consultation to include health and traffic implications after GP Dr David Pratt from St Stephen's warned that more houses would lead to more traffic pollution. 

Liberal Democrat councillor Ida Linfield challenged the council's decision to reclassify the area as "development land" when it was originally classed as recreational land under the Local Government Act. She said that selling the site to Berkeley Homes in 2006 could have breached the act and suggested that there could be a case for a judicial review.

Mr Carmichael said a report would be prepared for the overview committee on Wednesday, June 13. After the meeting campaigner Sian Pettman said:

"The resounding 'no' vote to residential development from Canterbury's own councillors will place a huge pressure on the executive to respond to public opinion and rethink plans for Kingsmead."

The council has been sent 246 letters of objection, a written petition of more than 650 signatures and the e-petition.

thisiskent 26th May 2012

Walk the walk

In about 6 months' time, there will be a flurry of democracy as we all choose our councillors. We might choose the old councillors; we might choose new councillors; we might choose you! Next week, CCC will be explaining how to be a councillor. I'm intrigued.

---

Ever thought you could run the council better? [Just about every time I think of it!] Now there is a chance to find out. Canterbury City Council is holding an open evening for would-be councillors at the Guildhall, Canterbury, on Tuesday, November 30th. The event kicks off at 6.30pm and could appeal to anyone thinking of standing as a candidate in the local elections in May, or those involved with parish councils and voluntary organisations.

Speakers will include the city council's chief executive, Colin Carmichael, and councillors who will offer an insight into the work involved. The evening will consist of brief presentations followed by a question-and-answer session.

Anyone who wants to attend should e-mail democraticservices@canterbury.gov.uk, indicating whether they are a prospective candidate or a member of an interested group. If the event is oversubscribed, priority will be given to prospective candidates. There will be a separate session for parish council elections and candidates.

For more details, call democratic services officer Nicola Adams on 01227 862005.

thisiskent

Closures "justified by fall in council grant"

HB Times 28th Oct 2010

Freedom of Information: what they say

HB Gazette 16th September 2010

Wall of silence

The council taxpayers of Herne Bay have just received a reassuring message from the city council. Apparently the town’s museum is not being closed after all - it just will not be open to members of the public! Talk about semantic gibberish!

As a concerned council taxpayer, I wrote to some 16 Conservative Canterbury city councillors in early December, expressing my opposition to the proposal to close the Herne Bay Museum as part of the 2010/11 budget cuts. I asked the councillors concerned to consider alternative methods of making the necessary savings and urged those representing the town to put the interests of the community before those of their political party.

Out of all those councillors contacted, only two - Ann Taylor and Peter Vickery-Jones - have had the decency to come back to me on this matter. The remaining 14 have not even deigned to acknowledge receipt of my correspondence! They might not agree with my sentiments concerning Herne Bay Museum, but surely common courtesy dictates some sort of response - if only to say that my comments would be given further consideration.

I am not a political animal and, accordingly have no particular party axe to grind. I deliberately targeted the Conservatives for the simple reason that they are currently the controlling party on the city council and, as such, form the executive which dictates policy. As a retired local government officer who served a number of local authorities in Kent for more then 30 years, I have never had a particularly high opinion of elected members in general. Some are hard-working and do have the best interests of their local community in mind, but many would appear to be there only for their own personal egos.

Their failure to reply to correspondence would only seem to indicate their complete unwillingness to discuss matters with concerned council taxpayers and has most certainly done nothing to enhance my opinion of them. For most people, pursuing a sporting interest, hobby or pastime costs money Councillors have chosen their particular pastime as being local politics. Why should other members of the community subsidise them in the pursuit of this chosen hobby?

Are the council taxpayers of Canterbury City Council getting value for money for the majority of their elected representatives? Council leader Cllr John Gilbey has been quoted in the local Press as being of the opinion that the number of elected members sitting on the Canterbury City Council is excessive and I, for one, fully agree.

An immediate reduction by say some 20 members (with the resultant reduction in associated allowances and expenses) would save council taxpayers somewhere between £100,000 and £150,000 per annum - a not inconsiderable amount and certainly much more than the projected annual savings on the whole of the city’s museum services budget.

I wrote to chief executive Colin Carmichael more than two weeks ago expressing my frustration at having received no response from city councillors. To date I have not received any response from him either on this matter! Have other readers encountered a similar wall of silence from Canterbury City Council?

John Fishpool, Herne Bay
HB Gazette letters, 4th Feb 2010