Stealth Tax or Education Contribution ?
The Council was recently asked to approve the County Council's policy on educational contributions required from developers when larger projects are given planning consent, for consultation. At the Doctor's House development in Great Witley a contribution in the tens of thousands was required. This money was allocated to an already approved programme at the head of the local pyramid namely the Chantry High School.No funds were allocated to the local school in Great Witley on the basis that the asset management plan did not require any. Of course this plan was approved before the development was known about so no account was taken of the additional school places needed. No discussion with the local Parish Councils was undertaken and in fact they only knew of the financial contribution when I told them.Various school governors have also expressed their concern at the situation to me.
The County's policy was apparently chosen because it gave the greater level of local consultation. Upon asking the County Officer at the meeting to explain why local people had in fact not been consulted, I was informed that it was not the concern of myself or the Parish Councils and that we should accept the judgement of the experts ie the County Officers. The meeting was also told that a decision had not been made by the Officers when I had in my hand a copy letter from such officers stating that it had.
There appear to be several issues that I will be pursuing further.
1.Are such receipts supposed to go for additional resources or into the general pot so that in effect no new funds are available for education?
2.Why do local residents not get a say in the matter.
3.Why do County Officers give different answers to different people when they are put on the spot?
If you are lucky enough to be consulted on this policy prior to its adoption, please take the time to read it and comment.It could have an important effect on local education facilities.
The Council was recently asked to approve the County Council's policy on educational contributions required from developers when larger projects are given planning consent, for consultation. At the Doctor's House development in Great Witley a contribution in the tens of thousands was required. This money was allocated to an already approved programme at the head of the local pyramid namely the Chantry High School.No funds were allocated to the local school in Great Witley on the basis that the asset management plan did not require any. Of course this plan was approved before the development was known about so no account was taken of the additional school places needed. No discussion with the local Parish Councils was undertaken and in fact they only knew of the financial contribution when I told them.Various school governors have also expressed their concern at the situation to me.
The County's policy was apparently chosen because it gave the greater level of local consultation. Upon asking the County Officer at the meeting to explain why local people had in fact not been consulted, I was informed that it was not the concern of myself or the Parish Councils and that we should accept the judgement of the experts ie the County Officers. The meeting was also told that a decision had not been made by the Officers when I had in my hand a copy letter from such officers stating that it had.
There appear to be several issues that I will be pursuing further.
1.Are such receipts supposed to go for additional resources or into the general pot so that in effect no new funds are available for education?
2.Why do local residents not get a say in the matter.
3.Why do County Officers give different answers to different people when they are put on the spot?
If you are lucky enough to be consulted on this policy prior to its adoption, please take the time to read it and comment.It could have an important effect on local education facilities.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home