Council coffers to drop by £800,000 more than expected (From Gazette)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting GAZETTE NEWS to 80360, or email
Council coffers to drop by £800,000 more than expected
1:00pm Monday 24th December 2012 in News
FINANCE bosses at Colchester Council have been told they must find an extra £800,000 savings to balance the books.
Next year, the grant given to the local authority is 0.9 per cent up on last year, largely because a large number of homes and social housing has been built in the borough.
But the government has indicated that in the following financial year - 2014/15 - the grant will be around £800,000 less than Colchester Council’s finance experts had predicted.
Since the coalition government was formed in May 2010, local authority budgets have fallen by an average of 30 per cent.
Mr Smith said: “Obviously, it’s bad news for Colchester taxpayers."
See the Christmas Eve Gazette for the full story
Comments(16)
Hamiltonandy
says...
3:31pm Mon 24 Dec 12
.
Colchester Council cannot keep squandering taxpayer's money on failed status symbols whilst there is a desperate need to fund the food banks and get the homeless off the streets.
.
Councillors should be there to serve the community and there is no place for the delusion known as the "cultural quarter". We need retail development with affordable rents to encourage new business.
Reginald47
says...
12:29am Tue 25 Dec 12
Hamiltonandy
says...
11:44pm Tue 25 Dec 12
.
The VAF was designed to fail even before it was built both financially and from its structural deficiencies. The arts flourished before Colchester Council put their status seeking delusions ahead of the public interest.
.
The council defined "cultural quarter" solely refers to the abandoned developments in Queen Street. Our historical monuments such as Colchester Castle are safe from the wacky ideas of Colchester Council.
.
It is shameful how both the Mercury Theatre and Colchester Arts Centre have lost funding whilst ever increasing amounts are poured into the golden banana.
.
Colchester Council cannot spend what it does not have. I would rather see popular and well respected arts institutions survive than face repeated cuts to prop up that failed project blocking up the old bus station.
.
Whatever I think, the public have voted with their feet. Few actually visit that hideous carbuncle. Just stand outside and see for yourself. The "visitor" figures are whatever Firstsite say they are.
.
Look at Firstsite accounts. Most funding is from the taxpayer through different routes such as the Arts Council. The local taxpayer is forced to contribute through ECC and Colchester Council. Even worse, most of expensive maintenance costs will be paid for on top by local taxpayers. Yet the public were ignored and a referendum refused.
.
Firstsite do not comply with their charitable objects and their VAF lease agreement with Colchester Council. Both state that everything Firstsite does must be arts related. Therefore doing wedding receptions, business conferences and investment seminars flor the rich are a misuse of the VAF.
.
Look at the vandalism occurring both inside and outside the VAF. See the rubbish all aroundthe VAF that Colchester Council ignores. Face it. Most never wanted the VAF and most will ignore it. This area should be a prime retail area bringing income into Colchester Council. Instead it is a huge financial drain we cannot afford.
.
Reginald47
says...
12:37am Wed 26 Dec 12
Say It As It Is OK?
says...
11:58am Wed 26 Dec 12
As for the Football Stadium this is a commercial enterprise, it was built on Council owned land and with an £8.4Million (30 year loan) raised by CBC and underwritten by us, the council tax payer.
Around 2.5% of residents use the stadium regularly but CBC felt it necessary to build it and in doing so they indulged a Multi Millionaire with his pipe dream. Of course Robbie Cowling could have built the stadium with his own money but clearly he was happy for the council tax payer to take most of the risk. I Don't think CBC would do this for any other commercial enterprise!
Oh, maybe they would for Tesco!
Happy new year.
Reginald47
says...
10:28pm Wed 26 Dec 12
A very happy new year to you too.
Hamiltonandy
says...
11:30pm Wed 26 Dec 12
.
Contrast that with the defective VAF that is of limited use as a visual arts facility. It actually has a negative value as no commercial business would take on such an impractical building. The site though is extremely valuable. I do not understand why valued and popular art institutions such as the Mercury Theatre have to lose subsidies to prop up the failed VAF when most ignore it. Hopefully Firstsite will have to face financial reality before more damage is done to the Mercury theatre and Colchester Arts Centre.
Say It As It Is OK?
says...
8:10am Thu 27 Dec 12
Reginald47 wrote:Just to put you right I have no hate for the football stadium or the club nor do I relish in the position the club is now in. However, you surely must agree Colchester United is a Commercial enterprise and therefore funds for such things should not come out of the public purse. If the club goes "belly up" it will be us who will have to pay.
And you, sir, are 95 per cent against everything the council does judging by your posts so we are as bad as each other. Whatever the rights or wrongs of building both the Stadium and the VAF - and I attend neither - both are now valuable assets the council owns on behalf of the taxpayer. I note from your various posts during the year that you have a particular hate for the football stadium so you must be a very happy man at the position of the club at the moment.
A very happy new year to you too.
My gripe has always been against the council, who blatantly ignored previous planning conditions agreed for the stadium. CBC pushed their own planning application through and ignored these matters because that suited their own agenda. They would not allow other developers to disregard planning conditions! Would they?
CBC failed to ensure the road infrastructure around the stadium was suitable and safe for pedestrians, now nearly 5 years after it was built this council remain happy for supporters to walk home, in the dark, along an unlit Boxted Road where supporter safely is compromised and accidents and personal injury have occurred.
And what did CBC do, they put a match day road closure order in place which denies residents free access to their homes, whilst it does absolutely nothing to improve pedestrian safety!
Now if you think that is the action of a caring and safety conscious council then please think again?
Longinus
says...
9:51am Thu 27 Dec 12
Hamiltonandy wrote:I find it interesting that when FirstSite gets receipt of around £850k a year over three years from the Arts Council of England, the museum service loses its £450k grant and has to make staff redundant. Luckily, I suppose, it is also in receipt of a sizable grant from HLF to redisplay the castle museum but constant cutting in the last 24 months has resulted in the loss of Tymperleys, the closure of Hollytrees and Natural History on a Monday (and during the castle closure this will remain the same so effectively Colchester is closed for tourist business on a Monday for the next year and a bit) and the imminent loss of the Museum Resource Centre. As for the castle museum being protected from the wacky council - only if they keep it and don't take it out to trust status when the game will, most definitely, change.
The community stadium is indeed a valuable asset that is fit for purpose. It was carefully designed for future developments of the stadium. Before the council decision was made to go ahead, there was widespread public involvement and discussion. Most people supported it and recognised its potential.
.
Contrast that with the defective VAF that is of limited use as a visual arts facility. It actually has a negative value as no commercial business would take on such an impractical building. The site though is extremely valuable. I do not understand why valued and popular art institutions such as the Mercury Theatre have to lose subsidies to prop up the failed VAF when most ignore it. Hopefully Firstsite will have to face financial reality before more damage is done to the Mercury theatre and Colchester Arts Centre.
Hamiltonandy
says...
2:32pm Thu 27 Dec 12
.
As in Thursdays gazette postbag comments I despair over the announced sale of the museum building near the castle park.
.
The abhorent and destructive behaviour of Colchester Council has made it reviled irrespective of party. This elected dictatorship refuses to answer questions or apologise for the trail of destruction left by the status seeking councillors.
Reginald47
says...
4:20pm Thu 27 Dec 12
Hamiltonandy
says...
11:08pm Fri 28 Dec 12
.
My first objection is the sale was announced before provision for the museum people is arranged. Secondly that from experience Colchester Council will have decided already who is permitted to buy it and no other bidders will be allowed. That happened with the secret sale of 15, Queen Street and the unfair way they sold off Tymperleys. Tymperleys is facing its second winter abandoned.
.
When Colchester Council stop behaving as an unlistening dictatorship I would be happy to work with them to improve Colchester. For example they refuse to respond to "have your say" speeches and illegally allow Firstsite to breach the lease terms for the VAF.
.
I have a feeling the proposed sale of the museum building will be stalled indefinitely and Colchester Council will be humiliated yet again.
jim_bo
says...
7:37am Sun 30 Dec 12
They could call it a roman heritage centre and actually attract people in, maybe even schools who want to see the artifacts ?
super waluigi
says...
7:02pm Sun 30 Dec 12
I don't like art, never have, never will. But this thread has nothing to do with the vaf building what so ever.
Attacking the vaf is a brainless and one dimensional view of why colchester will receive an estimated £800,000 less financing.
Face it, if you hate the building and have to bring it up in every thread when there is gleamingly obvious other focal points within the article, makes you pig headed in my opinion.
What about the coalition government????
What about the people who predicted the £800,000 loss????
What about the large number of affordable housing being built in colchester????
What about something else relevant, like perhaps, the global recession????
Nope, the vaf!!!!!!
Reginald47
says...
11:03pm Sun 30 Dec 12
Traffico says...
2:33pm Mon 24 Dec 12