|
|
 Cognosco |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.82
|
So none of this would have been made public if Bale.P. had kept her gob shut?
I expect there was a huge sigh of relief in Market Street when they realised they could finally get this off their chest, or, B, Ms Bale is now as popular as a fart in a spacesuit because of all the man-hours of extra work she's causing them.
Threep.
They will now be putting her on the naughty list along with Garvie! Or perhaps they will exclude her from future meetings as well?  |
|
|
|
|
|
| richard.garvie |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
Should the proposed changes to Business Rates go through, I wonder how much extra revenue WBC would gain from Parkway?
And that justifies giving away OUR parking revenue??? |
|
|
|
|
|
| user23.3 |
|
Posts: 1,664
Posts Per Day: 1.51
|
And that justifies giving away OUR parking revenue???
Just hypothesising, giving away OUR parking revenue for a bigger income from OUR business rates might be a rather good idea. |
|
 Logged |
|
|
|
|
| Greenham Common |
|
Posts: 1,974
Gender:  Male
Posts Per Day: 1.79
Location: Equine way
|
Just hypothesising, giving away OUR parking revenue for a bigger income from OUR business rates might be a rather good idea.
Might. |
|
|
|
|
|
| richard.garvie |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
Just hypothesising, giving away OUR parking revenue for a bigger income from OUR business rates might be a rather good idea.
Correct. But too many if's and but's right now to bank on it happening. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Cognosco |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.82
|
Might.
What is wrong with having both? Also keeping the valuable town centre site instead of giving it away for a £1. Whatever rates we get from Park Way we will lose from the other parts of town when it closes down. |
|
|
|
|
|
| richard.garvie |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
The short term problem that ser is ignoring is that we are losing revenue from car parking which would typically go into the general council budget. With cuts of £40m over four years, and with West Berkshire getting rid of the most council staff in West Berkshire, how can you justify giving our money away when you are cutting key services and putting people out of work??? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Cognosco |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.82
|
The short term problem that ser is ignoring is that we are losing revenue from car parking which would typically go into the general council budget. With cuts of £40m over four years, and with West Berkshire getting rid of the most council staff in West Berkshire, how can you justify giving our money away when you are cutting key services and putting people out of work???
Hey! Think of poor SLI they are only going to be makeing a small fortune for the coming years after spending that massive £1. WBC taxpayers are used to being screwed so no change there then? |
|
|
|
|
|
| richard.garvie |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
Hey! Think of poor SLI they are only going to be makeing a small fortune for the coming years after spending that massive £1. WBC taxpayers are used to being screwed so no change there then?
I never thought anything the council could do would shock me, but this is another level. How come this has never even been discussed before? Why was it hidden? Not one person has come on the forum and denied it. Elected members have told me it was agreed in 2008. YET NOBODY FROM THE ADMINISTRATION OR OFFICER WILL SAY ANYTHING. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Cognosco |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.82
|
I never thought anything the council could do would shock me, but this is another level. How come this has never even been discussed before? Why was it hidden?
Not one person has come on the forum and denied it. Elected members have told me it was agreed in 2008. YET NOBODY FROM THE ADMINISTRATION OR OFFICER WILL SAY ANYTHING.
Are you implying it was a secret Handshake?  |
|
|
|
|
|
| richard.garvie |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
No, what's worse is that the council discussed it behind closed doors with the public and press excluded. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Cognosco |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.82
|
No, what's worse is that the council discussed it behind closed doors with the public and press excluded.
Well a bit obvious that, if the public and press knew about it then it could very well have not gone ahead. I definitley think it will put shoppers off now that they know SLI will have their hands in their wallets every time they go shopping in Newbury. I do believe WBC have excluded openess and transparency from their vocabulary. |
|
|
|
|
|
| blackdog |
| October 29, 2011, 10:11pm |
|
Posts: 1,321
Posts Per Day: 1.20
|
So not only the normal taxpayers take a hit but now the new businesses are to take a hit as well? This is going to run and run as they say?
No, the businesses already pay a business rate - which could even be lowered if the suggested change ever happens. |
|
|
|
|
|
| blackdog |
| October 29, 2011, 10:31pm |
|
Posts: 1,321
Posts Per Day: 1.20
|
Just hypothesising, giving away OUR parking revenue for a bigger income from OUR business rates might be a rather good idea.
But it won't happen - the proposed changes to business rates means that councils will be encouraged to promote development by being able to keep a share (not all) of any increase in business rates in their area. As Parkway is now built it will not count as new development. In terms of the benefit you are suggesting WBC have messed up again - we would be better off if they had delayed Parkway by a year or so. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Cognosco |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.82
|
But it won't happen - the proposed changes to business rates means that councils will be encouraged to promote development by being able to keep a share (not all) of any increase in business rates in their area. As Parkway is now built it will not count as new development.
In terms of the benefit you are suggesting WBC have messed up again - we would be better off if they had delayed Parkway by a year or so.
We would have been better off not building at all!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
