DOCSLIB.ORG

Budget 2020/21

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Budget 2020/21 Rother District Council Report to - Council Date - 24 February 2020 Report of the - Executive Directors Subject - Budget 2020/21 Recommendation: It be RESOLVED: That the formal Council Tax Resolution at Appendix A be approved. Introduction 1. The Localism Act 2011 requires the billing authority to calculate a Council Tax requirement for the year, not its budget requirement as previously. 2. The precept levels of other precepting bodies have all now been received. These are detailed below: Town and Parish Councils 3. The Town and Parish Council Precepts (including Special Expenses for Bexhill and Rye) for 2020/21 are detailed in Appendix B and total £2,460,703 (2019/20 £2,330,405). The increase results in an average Band D Council Tax figure of £64.54 for 2020/21. East Sussex County Council 4. East Sussex County Council met on 11 February 2020 and set their precept at £56,882,666 (2019/20 £54,599,262) for the area of Rother. This results in a Band D Council Tax of £1,492.02 (2019/20 £1,434.78). This includes the Adult Social Care Precept of £129.60 at Band D in Council Tax. Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner 5. Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner met on 7 February 2020 and set their precept at £7,621,488.79 (2019/20 £7,226,854.13) for the area of Rother. This results in a Band D Council Tax of £199.91 (2019/20 £189.91). East Sussex Fire Authority 6. East Sussex Fire Authority met on 13 February 2020 and set their precept at £3,642,043 (2019/20 £3,564,528) for the area of Rother. This results in a Band D Council Tax of £95.53 (2019/20 £93.67). Excessive Council Tax increases 7. The Localism Act 2011 introduced a requirement for a local authority to determine whether its basic amount of Council Tax for a financial year is excessive, in which case a local referendum would be needed. Schedule 5 of the Localism Act 2011 has inserted a new chapter 4ZA into part 1 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. Section 52ZB sets out the steps needed to determine the level of tax which would be ‘excessive’. These steps are in effect c200224 - Budget 2020/21 to compare the level of increase in Council Tax with principles set out by the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State has indicated that, for 2020/21, an increase up to 3% or more than £5 and above in a District Council’s Council Tax would be excessive. This includes the impact of changes in charges from levying bodies, in Rother’s case the Internal Drainage Boards. 8. Cabinet have recommended Rother District Council’s basic amount of tax for 2020/21 to be increased to £184.10 (£4.65 or 2.59%); within the Secretary of State’s guidelines and is therefore not excessive. Budget Consultation 9. At the time of writing the Council had received 448 responses to the budget consultation, 58% of whom were supportive of a rise of £5 or going to referendum for a higher amount. A summary of the results are detailed in Appendix C, the full responses will be made available in the Members’ Room. Conclusions 10. The recommendations of the Cabinet are set out in the formal Council Tax Resolution in Appendix A. If the formal Council Tax Resolution at Appendix A is approved, the total Band D Council Tax will be as follows: 2019/20 2020/21 Increase £ £ % Rother District Council 179.45 184.10 2.6% East Sussex County Council 1333.80 1362.42 East Sussex County Council – 100.98 129.60 social care precept Total East Sussex County Council 1,434.78 1,492.02 4.0% East Sussex Fire Authority 93.67 95.53 2.0% Sussex Police Authority 189.91 199.91 5.3% Sub-total 1,897.81 1,971.56 3.9% Town and Parish Council (average) 61.24 64.54 5.4% TOTAL 1,959.05 2,036.10 3.9% Malcolm Johnston Dr Anthony Leonard Executive Director Executive Director c200224 - Budget 2020/21 COUNCIL MEETING Appendix A 24 February 2020 Budget 2020/21 DRAFT RESOLUTION To consider and, if thought fit, to pass a resolution in the following terms: - 1. (a) That Council approves the Rother District Council General Fund Council Tax Requirement of £7,018,739 for 2020/21 and the resultant Band D tax of £184.10 as set out in this report. (b) The expenses incurred by the Council, set out in the minutes of the Cabinet of 10 February 2020 in the sum of £624,080 in respect of Bexhill and £62,680 in respect of Rye, be approved as the Special Expenses chargeable to residents of Bexhill and Rye respectively. All other expenses incurred by the Council (excluding Parish Precepts) be approved as general expenditure for the purposes of section 35 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. (This resolution will be reviewed annually). 2. That it be noted, the following amounts for the year 2020/21 in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Tax Base) Regulations 1992, made under section 33 (5) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:- (a) 38,124.6 being the amount calculated by the Council in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 2012, as its Council Tax base for the year. (b) Ashburnham & Penhurst 192.20 Etchingham 422.10 Rye Foreign 175.40 Salehurst & Battle 2,699.30 Ewhurst 540.10 Robertsbridge 1,041.30 Beckley 554.90 Fairlight 891.00 Sedlescombe 678.50 Bexhill 16,701.70 Guestling 636.20 Ticehurst 1,640.30 Hurst Bodiam 159.00 Green 589.20 Udimore 187.10 Brede 859.60 Icklesham 1,228.90 Westfield 1,124.10 Brightling 201.00 Iden 238.60 Whatlington 157.40 Burwash 1,260.40 Mountfield 199.40 Rye Foreign 175.40 Salehurst & Camber 679.90 Northiam 1,057.30 Robertsbridge 1,041.30 Catsfield 355.10 Peasmarsh 514.00 Sedlescombe 678.50 Crowhurst 368.00 Pett 471.80 Ticehurst 1,640.30 Dallington 174.30 Playden 163.50 Udimore 187.10 East Guldeford 32.80 Rye 1,930.20 Westfield 1,124.10 being the amounts calculated by the Council in accordance with Regulation 6 of the Regulations, as the amounts of its Council Tax base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate. c200224 - Budget 2020/21 3. That the following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2020/21 in accordance with sections 32 to 38 of the Local Government and Finance Act 1992 as amended: - Being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in section 32(2)(a) to (e) of the a. £45,927,233 Act. (this amount is the Council's gross expenditure including the Parish Council Precepts and the Special Expenses for Bexhill and Rye). Being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council b. -£36,447,791 estimates for the items set out in section 32(3)(a) to (c) of the Act. Being the amount by which the aggregate at 3(a) above exceeds the aggregate at 3(b) above, calculated by the c. £9,479,442 Council, in accordance with section 32(4) of the Act, as its council tax requirement for the year. being the amount at 3(c) divided by the amount at 2 above (Item d. £248.64 T), calculated by the Council, in accordance with section 33(1) of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year. Being the aggregate amount of all special items referred to in e. £2,460,703 section 35(1) of the Act Being the amount at 3(d) above less the result given by dividing the amount at 3(e) above by the amount at 2(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with section 34(2) of f. £184.10 the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates. c200224 - Budget 2020/21 g. PARISH COUNCIL AREA BAND D £ Ashburnham & Penhurst 249.69 Battle 322.89 Beckley 225.55 Bexhill 222.29 Bodiam 248.88 Brede 228.11 Brightling 221.18 Burwash 250.72 Camber 286.52 Catsfield 247.27 Crowhurst 261.11 Dallington 232.49 East Guldeford 184.10 Etchingham 314.40 Ewhurst 310.79 Fairlight 254.81 Guestling 196.83 Hurst Green 262.77 Icklesham 276.44 Iden 251.16 Mountfield 249.80 Northiam 278.68 Peasmarsh 256.08 Pett 232.85 Playden 214.68 Rye 308.45 Rye Foreign 195.50 Salehurst 276.87 Sedlescombe 268.38 Ticehurst 273.35 Udimore 206.55 Westfield 221.80 Whatlington 229.21 being the amounts given by adding to the amount at 3(f) above the amounts of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council's area mentioned above divided in each case by the amount at 2(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with section 34(3) of the Act, as the basic amounts of its Council Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate. c200224 - Budget 2020/21 h. Valuation Bands LOCAL TAX AREA A B C D E F G H £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Ashburnham & Penhurst 166.46 194.20 221.94 249.69 305.18 360.66 416.15 499.38 Battle 215.26 251.14 287.01 322.89 394.64 466.39 538.15 645.78 Beckley 150.36 175.43 200.48 225.55 275.67 325.79 375.91 451.10 Bexhill 148.19 172.90 197.59 222.29 271.68 321.08 370.48 444.58 Bodiam 165.92 193.57 221.22 248.88 304.19 359.49 414.80 497.76 Brede 152.07 177.42 202.76 228.11 278.80 329.49 380.18 456.22 Brightling 147.45 172.03 196.60 221.18 270.33 319.48 368.63 442.36 Burwash 167.14 195.01 222.86 250.72 306.43 362.15 417.86 501.44 Camber 191.01 222.85 254.68 286.52 350.19 413.86 477.53 573.04 Catsfield 164.84 192.32 219.79 247.27 302.22 357.17 412.11 494.54 Crowhurst 174.07 203.09 232.09 261.11 319.13 377.16 435.18 522.22 Dallington 154.99 180.83 206.65 232.49 284.15 335.82 387.48 464.98 East Guldeford 122.73 143.19 163.64 184.10 225.01 265.92 306.83 368.20 Etchingham 209.60 244.53 279.46 314.40 384.27 454.13 524.00 628.80 Ewhurst 207.19 241.73 276.25 310.79 379.85 448.92 517.98 621.58 Fairlight 169.87 198.19 226.49 254.81 311.43 368.06
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Friends of the Hospital at Rye Newsletter Autumn 2017
    The Friends of The Hospital at Rye Newsletter Autumn 2017 Message from Your Chairman Open Garden Recently there has been great activity On Saturday 3rd June, David and Susie Nelson kindly around as architects, engineers, opened their secret garden in Mermaid Street in aid of The planners, healthcare managers, Friends of The Hospital at Rye. Lawn, shrubs and flower- historians and wildlife experts inspected beds looked their colourful best in the bright June our hospital site, working on our exciting sunshine and a selection of home-made cakes and and innovative plans! We hope this will refreshments lead to us becoming one of the leading were community hospital hubs in the UK by available. The offering more services and facilities. We plan to build a event raised state-of-the-art multi-functional building with facilities for £1,420 on the day care, therapies, counselling, health and leisure gate with a activities for all ages, as well as offices for social and further £240 health managers, a coffee bar for everyone and a 60-bed through the care home. The Friends are involved with the design and sale of raffle internal furnishings of the new centre, and are searching tickets. for a name for the building. Any ideas appreciated! The Chairs of the Friends of all the East Sussex Healthcare Trust hospitals met recently for an innovative Fashion Show Dragon’s Den type session, in which all staff members had been invited to apply for funding for new ideas for Another successful their service. It was exciting to help decide which ones to fashion show was support that will benefit our community, and all the held in May at the Friends supported this initiative.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf Download
    EN LD IR A O E N W R P E S U E O A R RCH G Woodcock Hammer 1748 (Mercers’ Company, London) A Bloomery Site in Burwash David Brown Crowhurst Forge, Surrey – a new site identified J. S. Hodgkinson Notice of Wealden Ironworks in Early English Newspapers J. S. Hodgkinson Volume 32 Wealden The Location of Etchingham Forge Brian Herbert & Tim Cornish Second Series Modelling Business Performance of a Mid-18th Century Cannon Manufacturer Alan F. Davies 2012 Iron Index WEALDEN IRON RESEARCH GROUP Bulletin No. 32 Second Series 2012 CONTENTS Page No. A bloomery site in Burwash, East Sussex David Brown 3 Crowhurst Forge, Surrey - a new site identified J. S. Hodgkinson 5 Notices of Wealden ironworks in early English newspapers J. S. Hodgkinson 11 The location of Etchingham Forge Brian Herbert & Tim Cornish 28 Modelling business performance of a mid 18th-century cannon manufacturer Alan F. Davies 35 Corrigenda 56 Index 57 Honorary Editor David Crossley, 5, Canterbury Crescent, Sheffield, S10 3RW Honorary Secretary David Brown, 2, West Street Farm Cottages, Maynards Green, Heathfield, Sussex, TN21 0DG © Wealden Iron Research Group 2012 ISSN 0266-4402 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher and copyright holders. www.wealdeniron.org.uk 2 A BLOOMERY SITE IN BURWASH, EAST SUSSEX DAVID BROWN The stream which rises on the north side of the Dudwell valley at TQ 637228 was investigated, following it past Poundsford Farm down to the river Dudwell.
    [Show full text]
  • Burial Register for St Bartholomew's Church, Burwash 1857-1888 Surname First Name 2Nd Name Sexabode When Buried Age Infants Buried by Additional Information
    Burial Register for St Bartholomew's Church, Burwash 1857-1888 Surname First name 2nd name Sex Abode When buried Age Infants Buried by Additional information Russell James M Burwash 07/17/1857 64 Egerton Noakes James M Burwash 08/17/1857 73 Egerton Farmer. Smell very offensive, ought to have been buried on Saturday Relf Ann F Ticehurst Union 08/17/1857 22 Egerton Edwards Ellen Gother F Burwash 10/20/1857 Infant Egerton Pankhurst Caroline F Burwash 11/01/1857 39 Egerton Sinden Sarah F Burwash 11/29/1857 82 Egerton Heathfield Henry M Burwash 12/05/1857 49 Egerton Whybourn Rose Ann F Burwash 12/07/1857 23 Egerton Salmon Harriet F Burwash 12/07/1857 26 Egerton Mepham Mary F Burwash 12/07/1857 47 Egerton Pope Elizabeth F Burwash 12/11/1857 Infant Egerton Dann Ellen F Burwash 12/19/1857 43 Egerton Noakes John M Burwash 01/15/1858 67 Towers Isted Anna F Burwash 01/20/1858 1 Egerton Eastwood William M Burwash 01/30/1858 74 Egerton Road haulier Waterhouse Samuel M Burwash 01/30/1858 65 Egerton Sutton Hannah F Burwash 02/25/1858 94 Egerton Sweetman Mary F Salehurst 03/15/1858 39 Egerton Boorman Edward F Burwash 03/22/1858 76 Egerton Smith James M Burwash 03/29/1858 10mths Egerton Jenner Walter M Burwash 04/01/1858 Infant Egerton Barrow Richard M Burwash 04/03/1858 45 Egerton Headstone states age as 47 years. Collins Henry M Burwash 04/13/1858 55 Egerton Akhurst Alma Jenner F Burwash 05/07/1858 11 mths Egerton Aspden William M Burwash 05/24/1858 81 Egerton Jarratt Matilda F Burwash 06/03/1858 25 Egerton Wroton Mary F Burwash 06/03/1858 31 Egerton Edwards Sarah F Burwash 08/28/1858 64 Egerton Sands Stephen M Burwash 09/04/1858 68 Egerton Post mortem.
    [Show full text]
  • Adherents from the Rape of Hastings and Pevensey Lowey of the Jack Cade Rebellion of 1450 Who Were Pardonned
    Adherents from the Rape of Hastings and Pevensey Lowey of the Jack Cade Rebellion of 1450 who were pardonned In June 1450 Jack Cade became leader of an originally Kentish rebellion of small property holders penalised by high taxes. The rebellion spread to involve men from neighbouring counties, especially Sussex. Cade assumed the name John Mortimer and demanded the removal of several of the King’s chief ministers and the recall of Richard, Duke of York. The rebel forces defeated a royal army at Sevenoaks, Kent, on 18 June, and went on to London. There the rebels executed the lord treasurer, James Fiennes. A degree of lawlessness followed and Londoners drove the rebels from the city on 5-6 July. The government persuaded many of the rebels to disperse by offering pardons, but Cade continued his activities. He was chased down, wounded and captured at Cade Street near Heathfield, Sussex, on 12 July, and died of his wounds whilst being transported to London. The list below is of those from the Rape of Hastings and Lowey of Pevensey who had taken part in or supported the rebellion and were granted pardons. It gives a good indication of how widespread this rebellion was. It attracted adherents from across the social spectrum and involved whole communities. Undoubtedly there was no way the normal severe capital retributions could be used to punish all those involved or whole communities would have been decimated and made unproductive, but some ringleaders were singled out and executed. Hundred Township Name Occupation or Title Baldslow Crowhurst
    [Show full text]
  • CATSFIELD PARISH COUNCIL the Village Hall, Church Road Catsfield, East Sussex TN33 9DP
    The Clerk: Mrs Karen Crowhurst CATSFIELD PARISH COUNCIL The Village Hall, Church Road Catsfield, East Sussex TN33 9DP Minutes of the Parish Council Meeting held on Phone 01323 848502 7th November 2018 in Hermon Cottage Email [email protected] Website www.catsfieldpc.co.uk Attended by: Cllr John Overall – Chairman Cllr Thomas- Vice Chairman, Cllr. Edwards, Cllr Hodgson (taking Minutes in the Clerks absence), Cllr Holgate and Cllr Scott. Also in attendance: Cllr Gary Curtis – Rother District Council. Members of the public 1 Item Minutes 1. To receive apologies for absence Apologies were received from County Cllr. Kathryn Field and Karen Crowhurst – The Clerk 2. To approve and accept the minutes of the Parish Council meeting held on 3rd October 2018 RESOLVED: That the Chair of the meeting is authorised to sign the Minutes for 3rd October 2018 3. To receive declarations of interest on agenda items Cllr. Holgate declared a personal interest in: Item 7 – Planning Applications RR/2015/3117/P and RR/2016/162/P for Wylands International Angling Centre, Wylands Farm, Powdermill Lane, Catsfield TN33 0SU, as a neighbour effected by the developments Cllr. Edwards declared a personal interest in: Item 7 – Planning Applications RR/2015/3117/P and RR/2016/162/P for Wylands International Angling Centre, Wylands Farm, Powdermill Lane, Catsfield TN33 0SU, due to family members using the grounds. Cllr. Hodgson declared a personal interest in: Item 6d - Insurance claim – as a relative of the insured. Item 16 – Village Hall as a Trustee and Parish Council’s representative 4. Public questions or comments relating to items on this agenda The Chairman invited the Member of the public to speak.
    [Show full text]
  • World War One: the Deaths of Those Associated with Battle and District
    WORLD WAR ONE: THE DEATHS OF THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH BATTLE AND DISTRICT This article cannot be more than a simple series of statements, and sometimes speculations, about each member of the forces listed. The Society would very much appreciate having more information, including photographs, particularly from their families. CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 The western front 3 1914 3 1915 8 1916 15 1917 38 1918 59 Post-Armistice 82 Gallipoli and Greece 83 Mesopotamia and the Middle East 85 India 88 Africa 88 At sea 89 In the air 94 Home or unknown theatre 95 Unknown as to identity and place 100 Sources and methodology 101 Appendix: numbers by month and theatre 102 Index 104 INTRODUCTION This article gives as much relevant information as can be found on each man (and one woman) who died in service in the First World War. To go into detail on the various campaigns that led to the deaths would extend an article into a history of the war, and this is avoided here. Here we attempt to identify and to locate the 407 people who died, who are known to have been associated in some way with Battle and its nearby parishes: Ashburnham, Bodiam, Brede, Brightling, Catsfield, Dallington, Ewhurst, Mountfield, Netherfield, Ninfield, Penhurst, Robertsbridge and Salehurst, Sedlescombe, Westfield and Whatlington. Those who died are listed by date of death within each theatre of war. Due note should be taken of the dates of death particularly in the last ten days of March 1918, where several are notional. Home dates may be based on registration data, which means that the year in 1 question may be earlier than that given.
    [Show full text]
  • Roads in the Battle District: an Introduction and an Essay On
    ROADS IN THE BATTLE DISTRICT: AN INTRODUCTION AND AN ESSAY ON TURNPIKES In historic times travel outside one’s own parish was difficult, and yet people did so, moving from place to place in search of work or after marriage. They did so on foot, on horseback or in vehicles drawn by horses, or by water. In some areas, such as almost all of the Battle district, water transport was unavailable. This remained the position until the coming of the railways, which were developed from about 1800, at first very cautiously and in very few districts and then, after proof that steam traction worked well, at an increasing pace. A railway reached the Battle area at the beginning of 1852. Steam and the horse ruled the road shortly before the First World War, when petrol vehicles began to appear; from then on the story was one of increasing road use. In so far as a road differed from a mere track, the first roads were built by the Roman occupiers after 55 AD. In the first place roads were needed for military purposes, to ensure that Roman dominance was unchallenged (as it sometimes was); commercial traffic naturally used them too. A road connected Beauport with Brede bridge and ran further north and east from there, and there may have been a road from Beauport to Pevensey by way of Boreham Street. A Roman road ran from Ore to Westfield and on to Sedlescombe, going north past Cripps Corner. There must have been more. BEFORE THE TURNPIKE It appears that little was done to improve roads for many centuries after the Romans left.
    [Show full text]
  • East Sussex COVID-19 Stakeholder
    COVID-19 Response Stakeholder briefing 14 January 2021 Response to COVID-19 – East Sussex This briefing aims to update you on the response across our local NHS system in East Sussex to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, in particular the vaccination programme. Latest position in East Sussex The number of new cases in East Sussex is going back up with 4,327 new COVID-19 cases reported in the latest available 7-day period as published by GOV.UK on Wednesday 13 January 2021. Managing demand on NHS services The demand for all NHS and care services across Sussex continues to be significant due to the high infection rates of COVID-19 in the community. In some places, we are now seeing triple the number of COVID-19 positive hospital inpatients compared with the first peak back in the spring, and numbers are still increasing. Staff across the NHS and local authorities are working tirelessly to ensure they continue to provide safe consistent care; hospitals, community teams, mental health services, social care, GP practices and the NHS111 telephone service are incredibly busy, but remain open. As you will have seen the Sussex Resilience Forum declared a Major Incident on Wednesday (January 6) to best respond to unprecedented pressures of Covid-19 on the county. A major incident is a recognition of national demand and puts all agencies in Sussex in the best possible position to come together to tackle the virus. It is a well-recognised and rehearsed escalation that can be expected at times of exceptional need – a major incident was also in place during the summer of 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • PARISH COUNCIL of PLAYDEN, EAST SUSSEX ______Clerk: Lesley Voice, C/O 1 the Grove, Rye, TN31 7ND
    PARISH COUNCIL OF PLAYDEN, EAST SUSSEX ____________________________________________________________________ Clerk: Lesley Voice, C/O 1 The Grove, Rye, TN31 7ND. Tel: 07767 221704 Minutes of the Council Meeting held remotely by Zoom and telephone on 3rd December 2020 at 7.30 p.m. Present: Councillors:, Mr P Osborne (PO) Chairman, Mr T Lenihan (TL) Vice Chairman, Mr A. Dickinson (AD), Mr D Stone (DS). East Sussex County Councillor: Not present Rother District Councillor: Not present Members of the Public: 0 Item Action 1 To accept apologies for absence: Sally-Ann Hart (S-A H) (Rother District Council). Now Member of Parliament for Hastings and Rye. Keith Glazier: East Sussex County Councillor 2 Declarations of interest on items on the agenda: AD – Shellfield planning appeal. 3 To approve the minutes of the Parish Council Meeting 5th November 2020: The minutes were unanimously approved and will be signed later by PO. 4 Neighbourhood Watch Report The Clerk had forwarded the Rother monthly newsletter. 5 Reports from visiting Councillors: East Sussex County Councillor: Not present: Rother District Councillor: Not present PO reported that there would be free parking in Rother DC carparks until the end of December on Thursdays and Saturdays. This would not apply to on street parking which is operated locally. Work is being undertaken on the environmental strategy of the Council. The Council continues to work remotely. 6 Public adjournment: To suspend the meeting for any public statements. Members of the public are encouraged to attend the meeting and raise any pertinent issues at this point. No members of the public had joined the Zoom meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Nmwffi&Ffi%-Rymr
    Salehurst & Robertsbridge Parish Council Nmwffi&ffi%-rymR Volume5 lssue3 December20l0 canvouherpprease? we wish ell residentsa Happy christmes and e weneedavorunteertoffi deliver the Newsletter Pgaegf,ul Ngw *gan to Oakland Drive. W j Ifyou can help please I contacttheclerkor I wE NEED yoaR qIEWSI Clf r. David Aflen - i The ParishCouncil is facing somedifficult decisionson streetlighting. Datesfor vour diarv I An EU directiveis expectedto requirethe withdrarvalof'all mercul) basedlamps ztilt I by 2012. lv{anufacturersare aheacl,"-anticipating this changeancl are stoppingthe manufactureof thesebulbs and this will meanthat eventuallyit'ovill be impossible Cu*eutly rve still have63 m€rcury larnpsand to'eplace t'*' all PtanningMeeting 6th . ::"::ll1t:,:1"'"'(this involves changing the lamphr:usiiig as rvell) rvould cost arouiid f 12,000! youthCen*e Loi.|io.' , Faceclu'ith this the Council hasreluctantly agreed to raisea loan over 5 )."eal'sto parishCouncit l Tth i cover the cost of replacernent- rryehave beett ahle to make sotle savingsin our Meeting January budgetto cover the cost of repaynrentof the loan lvhiclt meanstherc rvill be tto in- RobertsbridgeHall , creaseirr the preceptto cover tliis. 3rd ' Planning Meering ,, money trut u'e rvould like youthCentre Fr;;;"ry However,there are other &reaswhere we could save I your viervson these.Some of ;-on rna,"-alread,v- be alvaretlrat East SussexCC in line PlanningMeeting 3rd r with a numberof other authoritiesis considerilg turrringofl'street iights to save March 'fhis'fhiq l'outhCentre , *otl"y.rrr,rne\., lvillr,villnof not ir,rmecliatelyir,rnredi:rtelv affectaffer:t ourorrr parishnarich becausehecarrse ouroirr street ligh:sli lother : paid parishcouncit 2Ist than thoseon the bypasslvhich arethe respc;nsihilityof Highrva,vsAgency) are Meeting March I tbr by the parish.I{orvever.
    [Show full text]
  • 22Nd Sunday in Ordinary Time 29Th / 30Th August 2020
    OUR LADY IMMACULATE & ST MICHAEL, BATTLE with ST TERESA OF LISIEUX, HORNS CROSS 14 Mount Street, Battle, East Sussex, TN33 0EG Tel: 01424 773125 e-mail: [email protected] website: battlewithnorthiam.parishportal.net Parish Priest: Fr Anthony White Weekend Mass Times th Cycle A for Sundays and Solemnities 6pm Saturday 29 August – Year 2 for Weekdays Battle (Fr Peter Cullen) th Arundel and Brighton Trust is a 9am Sunday 30 August – Registered Charity No. 252878 Northiam (Hubert Lobo RIP) 10.45am Sunday 30thAugust – Private Prayer Sessions - Battle Battle (Fr Tony White) Monday, Wednesday Sacrament of Reconciliation Friday 10am – 11am after 6pm Mass Saturdays 22nd Sunday in Ordinary Time 29th / 30th August 2020 • Fr Paul is happy to receive Mass Intentions for the weekend Masses. • Mass Intentions passed to Fr Tony earlier this year will be said by Fr Paul privately, unless you would specifically like them to be said at one of the weekend masses, in which case you will need to contact the Parish Office. Please either give them directly to Fr Paul after Mass or let Maggie know of any future Intentions on 773125, e-mail [email protected], or drop a note through the Presbytery door, thank you. • In cases of special need Fr Raglan Hay-Will may be contacted in Eastbourne on 01323 723222. Mass Procedures for the Weekend 29th / 30th August • Arrive at least 10 minutes before the start of Mass. • The one-way system is back in operation at Our Lady Immaculate and St Michael, entrance will be through the Sacristy and exit will be via the main door.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Rother District Council Environment Strategy PDF 291 KB
    Rother District Council Report to: Cabinet Date: 27 July 2020 Title: Consultation Report – Draft Rother District Council Environment Strategy Report of: Ben Hook – Head of Service, Acquisitions, Transformation and Regeneration Cabinet Member: Councillor Field Ward(s): All Purpose of Report: To report the results of the public consultation for the draft Environment Strategy, and the recommendations of the Climate Change Steering Group Officer Recommendation(s): Recommendation to COUNCIL: That the Rother Environment Strategy 2020-2030 be approved and adopted, subject to the inclusion of the items listed in paragraphs 14 and 15 of the report, identified through the consultation process and recommended by the Climate Change Steering Group. Introduction 1. At its meeting on 16 September 2019 (Minute C19/38 refers), full Council agreed the following resolution to: i. Declare a ‘climate emergency’. ii. Review and update urgently Rother District Council’s current carbon strategy. iii. Pledge to do what is within our powers, to make Rother District carbon neutral by 2030, taking into account both production and consumption emissions. iv. Call on the Government to provide any additional powers and resources necessary for Rother District to achieve the target of becoming carbon neutral by 2030, and to implement best practice methods to limit global warming to 1.5ºC. v. Request that Cabinet establishes a Steering Group to report to full Council within six months with an Action Plan, outlining how the Council will address this emergency. The Carbon Neutral 2030 Action Plan will detail the leadership role Rother District will take in promoting community, public, business and other Council partnerships to achieve this commitment throughout the District.
    [Show full text]