Author Topic: Residents' parking permits set to rise  (Read 26470 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DaveWood

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
  • Gender: Male
    • Swindon Liberal Democrats
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #40 on: February 22, 2009, 11:14:57 PM »
I too look forward to Monday.

I fear that is this waits til 7pm on Monday that it will be fudged in the debate.

There is something rather suspect going on, so I'm going to try to have it out earlier in the day.

Offline kecl

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 377
  • Gender: Male
    • Broad Street Area Community Council
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #41 on: February 23, 2009, 07:19:48 AM »


There is something rather suspect going on

No 5h1t Sherlock!

I would say in the endevour to keep the Council Tax as low as possible, bearing in mind the cut in other incomes e.g. planning applications, the ommision to put it into the December budget shows that either 1)  a gross incompetence on the side of the SBC officers and the Cabinet Members involved, or 2) it has simply been seen as a yet unjustified 'cash cow'.

I did send a letter via email to Councillor Greenhalgh on the 13th Feb.(cc'd to Councillor Bluh and Edwards) asking a number of questions concerning this increase, but as yet no reply or even acknowledgement has been received from any of them.

I also put in an FOI request for info on the last few years income and expenditure for the Res. Park. on the 9th Feb. and still had no reply. Will chase this up today as more than 10 working days have now elapsed.

And we are told SBC is open and transparent - lololololol............


edit - typo
« Last Edit: February 23, 2009, 08:41:23 AM by kecl »
http://community.webshots.com/user/bucket66   http://www.broadstreetcc.btik.com/ He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #42 on: February 23, 2009, 01:44:44 PM »
 

I also put in an FOI request for info on the last few years income and expenditure for the Res. Park. on the 9th Feb. and still had no reply. Will chase this up today as more than 10 working days have now elapsed.

And we are told SBC is open and transparent - lololololol........




What to do when you suspect you're being stonewalled....


Quote from: The Information Commissioner's Office

We're here to help

If you think an organisation has failed to comply with the legislation we regulate, we may be able to help. This section will tell you the types of complaints we deal with and how to complain to us.

The Freedom of Information Act gives you the right to ask for official information from public authorities. If you have a complaint about freedom of information – maybe a public authority has refused to provide you with information you think you're entitled to – we may be able to help.



http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom_of_information.aspx




Offline Mart

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5249
  • Where's my cow?
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #43 on: February 23, 2009, 08:55:46 PM »
Cherry pickedby way through this council document thingy, beneath the interminable dross there were some moderately coherent words.

Wednesday, 10 December 2008
Committee Room 6, Civic Offices
(Anticipated meeting room)

At 6.15 p.m. or at the Conclusion of the Cabinet Open Forum


Time and location sorted.

On-street parking income: Budgeted income for on-street machines was increased
by £50k for 2008/09 to reflect the rollout of new machines in the Commercial Road
area. The installation of these machines has been delayed. We will continue to
monitor this situation and update income projections as necessary.


Kerching, that's shopping around Commercial Rd bolloxed soon then

Car Parking Income
Currently we are projecting all income headings to be on budget for the year.


This is without any mention of ramping up Residents Parking costs. Cos this is December before such things were being considered. Yeah, right.

2.26 Members will be aware that the Chancellor of the Exchequer reduced the
standard rate of Value Added Tax (VAT) from 17.5% to 15% for a 13 month
period from 1st December 2008. The Council has adjusted its financial
systems to allow for this change in order that customers are paying the
lower rate on any invoiced services. However, it has not been practical or
cost effective to adjust the pricing of fees and charges where the charge is
an all inclusive rate, as this would create unrounded pricing and the need to
reproduce signage, price lists and reprogramme tills and ticket machines in
a very short timeframe. An example is pay and display car parking income
where it would not be practical to reduce charges from £1.10 to £1.08 per
hour as the machines only accept silver change. In these circumstances,
the pricing has remained unchanged. As a result, the Council will be able to
keep an extra proportion of these income streams rather than paying them
over to Her Majesty’s Revenues and Customs. This is expected to equate
to around £200k in a full year which will be used to safeguard against further
dips in income streams as a result of economic factors and to help minimise
the level of Council Tax increase in 2009/10 for all residents.


Yup, £200k.

It's our f*cking money, we are not income streams. You could minimise the level of increase by not having so many silly job titles, for instance.

I'm sick to death of these people pretending they are captains of industry, yeah, of course they are, except they have low levels of risk, almost limitless funding and a customer base with steadily decreasing levels of expectation.

Anyone can succeed in Local Authorities I reckon.
Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don’t know what your rights are, or who the person is you’re talking to. Then, on the way out, slam the door.

Offline DaveWood

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
  • Gender: Male
    • Swindon Liberal Democrats
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #44 on: February 24, 2009, 12:09:47 AM »
Unfortunately when the flaws in the RP figures were presented to officers earlier today it was largely fudged, although they did concede it would welcome a review.

When RP was finally discussed at sometime after 11pm tonight our amendment was considered 'unnecessary' by the administration as we are now, apparantly, entering a period of 'consultation' (after the decision was made to increase permit costs, of course).

But PG said that if the figures were wrong it could be looked at in the next two months, which I'll take at his word. 

So the usual cynical manoevering, but the work has only just started in convincing the administration that this is a load of rubbish.

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #45 on: February 24, 2009, 12:47:40 PM »

When RP was finally discussed at sometime after 11pm tonight our amendment was considered 'unnecessary' by the administration as we are now, apparantly, entering a period of 'consultation' (after the decision was made to increase permit costs, of course).

But PG said that if the figures were wrong it could be looked at in the next two months, which I'll take at his word. 

So the usual cynical manoevering, but the work has only just started in convincing the administration that this is a load of rubbish.


Hahaha......best laugh I've had all week, and it's only Tuesday.

This administration doesn't consult, doesn't listen and doesn't care about the people it claims to serve.

Question Tory Councillors closely and you'll quickly realise that they don't see or hold themselves as accountable for anything and will cheerfully pass the buck and heap blame onto anybody else, (but usually 'the officers'), for everything from Residents Parking to Vandalism and graffiti.  They are not the slightest bit interested in the opinions of others because they are convinced they are right, and every one else is wrong.

We should acknowledge, (however reluctantly), that although we are used to seeing political fuckwittage in Euclid Street, when councillors begin describing whole sections of the electorate as  'revenue streams' there is something seriously wrong in the relationship between the 'public servants' and those who elected them.
 
Obsessed with low increases in council tax but utterly unable to control their addiction to the perqs and baubles of civic power.....cabinet councillors look down every avenue with a view to screwing ever more cash out of it with an efficiency that would make even a Kraut beaurocrat blush.

People are not cattle, Swindon is not a milking parlour and councillors are not supposed to be herdsmen and milk maids.

There will be a reckoning.

Offline Mart

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5249
  • Where's my cow?
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #46 on: February 24, 2009, 12:49:19 PM »
So the usual cynical manoevering, but the work has only just started in convincing the administration that this is a load of rubbish.

Empty the bins then.

Anything I can do to help, I specialise in laboured analogies, sweeping generalisations and sarcasm.

I also dabble in swearing.
Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don’t know what your rights are, or who the person is you’re talking to. Then, on the way out, slam the door.

Offline Mart

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5249
  • Where's my cow?
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #47 on: February 24, 2009, 12:58:26 PM »
Bugger it's all gone out of order.

I think it is political pondlife as a whole that need overhauling

Got this nasty little local scam, cos that's what it is, one of those morally bereft but perfectly legal decisions that the scumbags make, then at the top of the tree we have the national scam of an investment opportunity in Royal Mail for which only one firm has shown any interest, decision making being made that little bit easier by the purely coincidental publication of a letter vis a vis the pension fund.

The pension fund that was screwed over by the current Prime Mentalist along with thousands of others.

We also have LDV left to dangle after a remarkably swift piece of decision making.

Meanwhile we are in the hole for wifty wafty things to the tune of £1.3 trillion.

My conclusion is that the vast majority of politicians are morally bankrupt, ignorant of their proper purpose and nothing but a burden on the societies they profess to serve.

I hate them with an enthusiasm I thought I was incapable of mustering.
Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don’t know what your rights are, or who the person is you’re talking to. Then, on the way out, slam the door.

Offline DaveWood

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
  • Gender: Male
    • Swindon Liberal Democrats
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #48 on: February 24, 2009, 03:14:21 PM »
So the usual cynical manoevering, but the work has only just started in convincing the administration that this is a load of rubbish.

Empty the bins then.

Anything I can do to help, I specialise in laboured analogies, sweeping generalisations and sarcasm.

I also dabble in swearing.

I know you live in Eastcott, so we will be asking for help from yourself and all local residents.

Offline kecl

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 377
  • Gender: Male
    • Broad Street Area Community Council
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #49 on: February 24, 2009, 04:33:04 PM »
The proposed Lib Dems amendments to the budget, unanimously rejected by the Conservative Group, concerning the residents parking, were thus:

This Council Further notes:
1.   Residents Parking permit prices were last increased in 2005.
2.   That the £122,000 for 'Departmental Overheads' identified in the Residents Parking budget has been applied to the budget for the first time this year, without adequate explanation as to why RP existed for over 20 years without these charges being applied.
3.   That these Departmental Overheads would still need to be paid whether or not there was a Residents' Parking scheme - and therefore the permit increases of £121,000 could just be seen as using Residents' Parking to plug other areas of the budget.
4.   2009/10 is the first year using the new 'Parking Model', which has increased the allocation of Parking Attendant salaries from approximately £120,000 to £300,000.
5.   This increase in PA salaries of £180,000 has not been satisfactorily justified; these figures appear to be suspect and should be reviewed before permit costs are increased.
6.   That increasing permit prices on the basis of suspect figures would leave the Council open to:
a.   Review by the District Auditor
b.   Action by resident campaign groups, similar to that in 2005.



So basically the Cons. have moved the goal posts as far as the Res. Parking costs are concerned and it would seem from the above comment: these Departmental Overheads would still need to be paid whether or not there was a Residents' Parking scheme , blatently shows that residents parking is being used to raise revenue.

It will be interesting to see exactly what form and with whom the consultations on Residents Parking, mention by Peter G, will take!!!!!!!
http://community.webshots.com/user/bucket66   http://www.broadstreetcc.btik.com/ He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with

Offline DaveWood

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
  • Gender: Male
    • Swindon Liberal Democrats
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #50 on: February 24, 2009, 05:53:27 PM »
Yes, those were our words.

Although the Tories did take issue with some of them.

Offline ZPW

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Bob Wright better do a stellar job
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #51 on: February 24, 2009, 06:00:18 PM »
I am using a reduced font in the hope ( deluded) that it will reduce the clamour of the retorts.

First we have this fact( ish) posted by Kecl for consort a telephone book back



Quote
Residents Parking - Prices for residents and visitor/business permits have not
increased for many years. The cost of providing this service exceeds the
income it generates. A proposed increase in permit charges of £15 would still
leave the service subsidised to the tune of £100k per annum

Taken from the Revenue Budget 2009-2010 - Appendices 1 to 9  page 10.



Apart form the silly assertion that charge for permits have been static for generations, is it not possible that it does cost the taxpayer 100k more than the service costs? are you all suggestiing that lies and chicanery are afoot? why would someone lie about this?


Later on in this tome we have the nugget of naughtiness unearthed by Stella-Mart which follows.
Tish-Tosh EssBeeSee SeePeeToo esquire. This type of behaviour is sometimes described as fraud.. which is the action of taking money from people under false pretences. Your Mothers would be ahamed of you. Give it back.


Quote
2.26 Members will be aware that the Chancellor of the Exchequer reduced the
standard rate of Value Added Tax (VAT) from 17.5% to 15% for a 13 month
period from 1st December 2008. The Council has adjusted its financial
systems to allow for this change in order that customers are paying the
lower rate on any invoiced services. However, it has not been practical or
cost effective to adjust the pricing of fees and charges where the charge is
an all inclusive rate, as this would create unrounded pricing and the need to
reproduce signage, price lists and reprogramme tills and ticket machines in
a very short timeframe. An example is pay and display car parking income
where it would not be practical to reduce charges from £1.10 to £1.08 per
hour as the machines only accept silver change. In these circumstances,
the pricing has remained unchanged. As a result, the Council will be able to
keep an extra proportion of these income streams rather than paying them
over to Her Majesty’s Revenues and Customs. This is expected to equate
to around £200k in a full year which will be used to safeguard against further
dips in income streams as a result of economic factors and to help minimise
the level of Council Tax increase in 2009/10 for all residents.

Then we have all the dirt-bagging of Cllrs and their kin. things like..

My conclusion is that the vast majority of politicians are morally bankrupt, ignorant of their proper purpose and nothing but a burden on the societies they profess to serve.

I hate them with an enthusiasm I thought I was incapable of mustering.


and

Quote

Obsessed with low increases in council tax but utterly unable to control their addiction to the perqs and baubles of civic power.....cabinet councillors look down every avenue with a view to screwing ever more cash out of it with an efficiency that would make even a Kraut beaurocrat blush.

People are not cattle, Swindon is not a milking parlour and councillors are not supposed to be herdsmen and milk maids.

There will be a reckoning.

that being from Geoff-bin-in, but I lost the quoting knack..

and so on and so on...


Seems to me.. that there may be a mistake?
apart from what others may call robbing and theiving from pay and displays, which we know, just know EssBeeSee CeePeeToo esquire will hand back... maybe, the bean counters are either;
1.wrong.
2.dobbing PeeGee innit.

one other weensie thing... apart from the amdega builders and the pro-id muppets. i do not agree that all cllrs are opportunist gutter slime. i belive, nay know.. that there are some who are actually doing the right and correct thing and serving their communities... there...

another weensie thing.. it is not normal for a leopard to change it's spots etc etc... if PeeGee was a Good Thing (and he was...)
then he probably still is.

Offline DaveWood

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
  • Gender: Male
    • Swindon Liberal Democrats
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #52 on: February 24, 2009, 06:07:16 PM »
Apart form the silly assertion that charge for permits have been static for generations, is it not possible that it does cost the taxpayer 100k more than the service costs? are you all suggestiing that lies and chicanery are afoot? why would someone lie about this?
if PeeGee was a Good Thing (and he was...)

Whether it's an error or something else is a matter of opinion, I guess..

if PeeGee was a Good Thing (and he was...)

Where is your evidence  ;)

Offline Geoff Reid

  • Twitter: @Geoff_Reid
  • Active But Odd
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Gender: Male
  • Bald as a chimps arse
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #53 on: February 24, 2009, 07:20:45 PM »
PG 'the person' is a good bloke...

....But PG 'the cabinet member' has turned to the dark side of the force, Luke.

I agree with Zippy, many cllr's do do the right thing by their wards while the politically ambitious get so wrapped up in the game they appear to forget why they wanted to be a councillor in the first place.

Offline ZPW

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Bob Wright better do a stellar job
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #54 on: February 24, 2009, 07:39:19 PM »
Apart form the silly assertion that charge for permits have been static for generations, is it not possible that it does cost the taxpayer 100k more than the service costs? are you all suggestiing that lies and chicanery are afoot? why would someone lie about this?
if PeeGee was a Good Thing (and he was...)

Whether it's an error or something else is a matter of opinion, I guess..



Well, actually no.... I don't agree.
it is a matter of fact.


if PeeGee was a Good Thing (and he was...)


Where is your evidence  ;)

My evidence sits happily and fatly with the council  motion that PeeGee put before EssBeeSee CeePeeToo esquire in which Council agreed not to use the Goivt ID Card for acces local services.
It would have wayy easier to have done nothing at all.
Indeed, I think the Lib.Dems  took vthat route.

As well, I understand that PeeGee was fairly useful in the quest to not chip bins.

Again... would have been fairly easy to have done nothing...

Am I in court here? No... it seems that PeeGee is...
Thwack Thawack back at you.

Offline Chav

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2385
  • Gender: Female
  • INNIT!
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #55 on: February 24, 2009, 09:19:51 PM »
PG 'the person' is a good bloke...

....But PG 'the cabinet member' has turned to the dark side of the force, Luke.

I agree with Zippy, many cllr's do do the right thing by their wards while the politically ambitious get so wrapped up in the game they appear to forget why they wanted to be a councillor in the first place.

Spot on ! :clap: :clap:

Trouble is, when Cllrs end up getting so wrapped up in the game, they do go on the turn.
They start to become power possessed control freaks, who then present themselves to the people who voted them in, and those who did not.........unaproachable, intimidating, its my way or no way types.

This in turn WILL have an impact on his/her future in politics as in the end no ****er person is going to vote for someone who they feel is unapproachable.
...............................I know I damn well wouldnt.

I think sometimes they do forget why they wanted to be a Cllr in the first place.
I would have thought they would have started out as people persons, and community orientated.
Mind you, there are those who just like the status - they think its a 'power thing' and to be honest you can pick them out as it stands out a mile.

However, there are some bloody good Cllrs out there too, who do work hard, have fantastic people skills, and manners, and who are approachable .

Its just such a shame that the odd few lose that ability and fail to see it, because everyone else can.

Maybe some need a quiet word in their ear from those above them to kick them back into touch with reality.

                                      Chav  ;)
"Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects." -- Lester B. Pearson.

Offline Mart

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5249
  • Where's my cow?
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #56 on: February 24, 2009, 10:39:45 PM »
I think that the vast majority of councillors start out as good eggs, they think 'My councillor is a bit of a twat, I could do much better than that, after all, I live here'.

Then the first compromise. If you want to be a councillor then you are probably going to have to get yourself politically affiliated, you might already have the disease, or addiction. It is my view that over, ooh, the last decade, politics and it's users have cost this country a lot more than heroin addiction (if you mispell that it says heron addiction, I think that's funny), alcohol abuse and Sven Goran Eriksson. Politics is not a necessary component of common sense policy making, rather it detracts and deflects.

So, you make a raft of promises (fingers crossed, doesn't count, didn't inhale etc, if you examine what I actually said blah blah) and bugger me, you are a councillor. You could at this point abandon decision making altogether from what I can tell, just rock up now and again rack up the expenses, get yourself on a committee or three and rack up some more, still no decision making, just do as you're told by the party, yup, a lucrative hobby indeed.

Whaddya mean Mart? I hear you say. I also heard someone mutter 'Get to the f*cking point' but I'll ignore you.

Residents Parking.

Some berk pronounces of Residents Parking

This is an area where prices haven’t gone up for quite some time.

Well except for 2006. Factually incorrect, yet not a word of condemnation from his colleagues. Party loyalty before proper representation of residents perhaps?

Berk further pronounced:

“We don’t believe the increases are unreasonable"

Perfectly understandable if you do not have to pay them, but, again factually incorrect. £12.50 in 2006 to £40.00 in 2009. Again, nobody moves to correct the berk. Facts, inconvenient little buggers.

Hopelessly intoxicated by the sound of his own voice the berk trundles on:

We have to look at all possibilities to raise revenue in the current climate

Residents are revenue streams, not very PC is it? Erm, cut in councillor allowances perhaps?

Berk also dribbled:

“We are not seeking to cut jobs in parking enforcement – what are doing is looking at making savings in that department. That means that if the department is running well with 80 per cent of the staff it is recommended to have, then perhaps we don’t need to fill that further 20 per cent.

Well, given that:

2009/10 is the first year using the new 'Parking Model', which has increased the allocation of Parking Attendant salaries from approximately £120,000 to £300,000.

The 80% left are on a good screw then, or is this evidence of budgetary smoke and mirrors to defend an otherwise indefensible argument? I couldn't possibly say.

The berk was not finished yet, now running on full blither:

“We are also bringing Sunday parking into line with weekdays in the town centre. Retailers have raised concerns over this but I think most people would now see Sunday as a shopping day like any other.”

I would have been singularly impressed if they had brought weekday parking into line with Sunday's, I assume he and his ilk are giants in the retailing industry given the disdain with which other retailers' concerns are swatted aside. I also admire the aplomb with which the last vestiges of Sunday being a day of rest are consigned to history.

Twat.


Then there is this little oversight:

That the £122,000 for 'Departmental Overheads' identified in the Residents Parking budget has been applied to the budget for the first time this year,

Comfortably covered by the £200k being raked in from the non VAT cut in parking charges.

Only a particularly backward chimp would think all of this bollocks was anything less than ill considered trimming aimed at achieving a politically correct council tax rise. My advise would be to look closer to home and stop pissing money away, that's my money by the way. Comments that are clearly factually incorrect are smiled and nodded through because compliance with the party line is unquestioning.

It is not very attractive is it?

I know you live in Eastcott, so we will be asking for help from yourself and all local residents.

That 'I know where you live' gave me a bit of a fright, but I'm over it now. Ask away, but if you even whisper 'lib dem' I will get very sweary. It's got sod all to do with the 'lib dems'. It is about reversing an unfair increase in residents' parking based on questionable adding up and heralded by factually incorrect statements. Political sodding about created the mess, it's going to take truth and commonsense to sort it out.

Personally I think we're buggered.





Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don’t know what your rights are, or who the person is you’re talking to. Then, on the way out, slam the door.

Offline kecl

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 377
  • Gender: Male
    • Broad Street Area Community Council
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #57 on: February 24, 2009, 11:08:19 PM »
Quote
is it not possible that it does cost the taxpayer 100k more than the service costs? are you all suggestiing that lies and chicanery are afoot? why would someone lie about this?
Well Zippy, yes apparently, according to Councillors Edwards and Greenhalgh, it would appear that it is possible for the Residents Parking Scheme to cost the taxpayer £100k more than the income from the sale of permits.

Quote
are you all suggestiing that lies and chicanery are afoot? why would someone lie about this?
I’m personally not suggesting that people are lying, not without the full facts and figures in front of me anyway, but something certainly doesn’t seem to be running true in all of this, so maybe a few hard facts and figures that the increases are based on would not go amiss???

No one would argue that RP should pay for itself, but the fact is between the proposed budget put to Cabinet on the 10th December and the one put to Cabinet on the10th February, it was suddenly discovered that there was an extra cost of operating the residents parking of £100k, even after the proposed huge increases had been implemented.

The question is, if it’s going to cost an extra £100k to be borne by all Council Tax payers, even after the prices are increased (by 60 % for first permits) how much is it being subsidised by now? And how, if the Conservative money men, sorry persons (wouldn’t want to upset Cllr. XL!!!) are as prudent and clever with their sums as they would have us all believe, did they miss out on such a huge drain on everyone else’s council tax for what must have been a substantial amount of time.

What has become apparent, from what the Lib Dems are saying (and I have no reason to doubt it), is that the way the costs of RP are calculated have altered (between the Dec and Feb Cabinet meetings one suspects) and an extra £122k ‘Departmental overheads’ were added to the ‘bill’ that have never been applied to RP before.

Now, once again based on the Lib Dems bits, if these £122k ‘Departmental overheads’ would have to be paid out even if there was no Residents Parking Scheme in Swindon, then firstly what do these dept. overheads actually apply to? And secondly it shows that the RP Scheme is being used as an income boost for the Councils coffers and that certainly isn’t fair on the 5000 plus households that pay for the privilege of parking close to their homes.

It seems to me that residents parking is an easy target to boost income, hit a relatively small percentage of the towns population, not represented by the blue flag, with an extra 'tax' and help keep the Council Tax increases lower for the rest of the town.    :bottom:
 





http://community.webshots.com/user/bucket66   http://www.broadstreetcc.btik.com/ He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with

Offline Mart

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5249
  • Where's my cow?
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #58 on: March 15, 2009, 07:01:56 PM »
I know you live in Eastcott, so we will be asking for help from yourself and all local residents.

C'mon then cocker! I've fired off a couple of e-mails all on my own, spellings pretty good, I even lobbed in some punctuation, here's me Feb 9th ramblings:

In the first quarter of 2006 this council saw fit to introduce sweeping changes to the residents parking scheme, in general terms the changes allied reduced availability with increased costs. Residents made it known to the council that the changes were not satisfactory, and that the councils’ contention that consultation had taken place and the changes were agreed was untrue.
 
At a council meeting shortly afterwards the majority of the changes were withdrawn, I believe the Evening Advertiser claimed a ‘u-turn’ which was
somewhat of an exaggeration. However in my view the review of council’s position indicated a concession on the part of the council that the changes were ill
conceived and unfair to the community the council exists to serve.
 
There were other outputs from the meeting; significant among them were undertakings to review road markings with the intention of removing unnecessary
parking restrictions and a vague assurance that residents who had the facility of off road parking were to be incentives to use that facility, the council also
took as an action the task of setting up a residents parking group.
 
The reality is that few of the actions accepted, and volunteered, by council have been seen through to satisfactory conclusions.
 
Now we hear that residents parking charges are to be increased without any clear indication of how the additional income will be disposed of by council. The
contention that by Councillor Mark Edwards, that, apparently: “This is an area where prices haven’t gone up for quite some time” shows a fairly poor grasp of
the facts as evidenced by the list shown below, I am also concerned to hear him state: “We don’t believe the increases are unreasonable and we have to look at
all possibilities to raise revenue in the current climate.” as during the last time this subject was visited the council gave a very clear indication that
residents’ parking was not in fact a revenue stream.
 
Up to 3rd April 2006
Residents’ permit - £12 per annum
Visitors’ permit - £5 per book
Business permit - £576 per annum in Zone A; and £494 in all other Zones.
 
After 3rd April 2006
First residents’ permit - £25 per annum – homeowners – increase of £13
First residents’ permit - £12.50 per 6 months – tenants – new permit
Second residents’ permit - £50 – increase of £38
Third residents’ permit - £100 – only those previously entitled to one – increase of £88
Visitors’ permit - £5 per book – no increase
Business permit - £576 per annum in Zone A; and £494 in all other Zones – no increase
 
Proposed increases 2009
First residents’ permit - £40 per annum – homeowners – increase of £15
First residents’ permit - £25 per 6 months – tenants – increase of £12.50
Second residents’ permit - £50 – increase TBA
Third residents’ permit - £100 – only those previously entitled to one – increase TBA
Visitors’ permit - £15 per book – increase of £10

My specific questions are:
 
•   What increase in residents’ parking spaces was delivered through the review of unnecessary road markings?
•   What incentives have been offered to those residents with access to off road parking to use that facility?
•   What progress has been made in setting up the residents parking group?
•   Does the council agree that less than three years can accurately be described as ‘quite some time’ in this context?
•   Is it the view of the council that an increase from £12 to £40 for a first residents permit in less than three years is not ‘unreasonable’?
•   At what meeting was it agreed that residents parking fees would, in future, be viewed as a revenue stream?
•   What cost element of residents parking has risen so sharply that a tripling of some parking charges has been prompted?
•   What resident experience improvements can be expected as a result of the increased revenue the council will be enjoying?



The prompt and incisive reply that crawled it's way around the interweb and plopped in me in inbox on the 11th March:

Thank you for your Email of 23 February 2009 regarding Residents Parking
Charges.
 
I understand that you also submitted an Email to our Customer Service team on 9
February 2009 concerning the same issues. I am sorry for the delay in replying
to your initial Email but I understand that Mr Ceri Stephens will be responding
to you within the next few days which I think addresses the issues you have
raised in this and you original Email..

Jack Mather
Parking Representations Officer


Given the speed of response and the fact that I am being responded to by an officer (!) can only mean that I have them on the back foot and happy days will soon be here again for all residents. Oh yes indeedy.

Wibble.
Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don’t know what your rights are, or who the person is you’re talking to. Then, on the way out, slam the door.

Offline DaveWood

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
  • Gender: Male
    • Swindon Liberal Democrats
Re: Residents' parking permits set to rise
« Reply #59 on: March 18, 2009, 05:55:54 PM »
I know you live in Eastcott, so we will be asking for help from yourself and all local residents.

C'mon then cocker! I've fired off a couple of e-mails all on my own, spellings pretty good, I even lobbed in some punctuation, here's me Feb 9th ramblings:

We are having one final shot at making this change 'from the inside'.  The Residents' Parking Clandestinity Group is meeting on Tuesday.  I've made it clear that if we're not satisfied by the results of this then it's to the streets.

One unamusing aside is that following the decision being made with no consultation, and the announcement that the 2 month statutory notice period would take place after the decision had been made (up to 1st June), that I had a look in the One Stop Shop at one of the permit issuing desks and discovered a notice that they are intending to start charging the new fees from April 1st!