LETTERSFrom Tony Barton, Ventnor:
I AM concerned about the operation of Ventnor Town Council, and, in particular, the proposed precept and its handling of the Winter Gardens.
The proposed precept shows a 50 per cent increase. Totally unacceptable in these straightened times!
The principal increase is in Winter Gardens subsidy increasing from £39,129 to £68,170 (74 per cent).
However, analysis shows this is after the council proposes to pay the Winter Gardens £12,000 for general office services and "cost recovery in respect of former concessionaire", £7,200, (I now know this refers to payment made to take over tenant's fixtures and fittings), increasing the Winter Gardens support to £87.370, an increase of 123 per cent.
The document detailing the proposed increase uses the 2009/10 budget as the basis for comparison.
It would be really interesting to see what kind of mess is being made of the current year. It is also relevant that the current state of reserves should be disclosed. How on earth they think they can make a success of running a large bar and restaurant defies me. Further evidence of their arrogance and indiscipline with regard to public spending.
The rift in the council is shown in meeting after meeting, with disagreement, sniping, unanswered questions, manoeuvrings to attempt to discredit colleagues and former colleagues, and personal insults.
A small sub-group was elected last spring with the intention of sorting out the Winter Gardens, no bad thing, but then set out to destroy all that was good without offering better.
The first and most obvious destructive act was to alienate the large group of willing volunteers.
Their principal duties were to operate the box office and to provide front of house staff. The latest news is they have been invited back.
The restaurant concessionaire, after making a real success of the operation to the benefit of the town and the Winter Gardens, was also totally alienated and surrendered his contract.
I know much of this did not follow local authority guidelines but concentrated on getting the jobs done but this does not come close to excusing the behaviour of this sub-group of councillors.
I realise these councillors are elected representatives and, as such, have a fair amount of freedom to act as they think best. I also believe they have a duty to act responsibly on behalf of the town and their constituents.
I feel the town needs a full explanation from an impartial commentator, if such a being exists. The disastrous finances are more appropriately dealt with by a surcharge on the sub group of councillors and the proposed precept increase should be capped.
I am happy to put my points to the mayor but regret that he is one of the damaging sub-group.