From: Tony Calloway, Battlegates, Battle
George Kiloh’s letter (March 22) clearly shows his close interest in the working of Battle Town Council. It’s a pity his thoughts do not extend to the town’s Council Tax payers.
His comments about counting farthings clearly show his contempt at people who live in our beautiful town who find it very difficult to pay the bills at the end of the week and do not want to face large unnecessary increases in Council Tax.
The recently-received Council Tax bill for 2019/20 shows the amount we pay to live in Battle is not far short of what we also pay to Rother. If we lived in Bexhill, we would only pay the Rother amount for the same services.
We not only pay for our own street lighting, playing fields, cemeteries, Christmas lights, etc, we also pay towards those in Bexhill – we pay twice!
All the fees collected in Battle car parks go to Rother to be spent across the district – yet again a benefit to Bexhill residents whose car parks raise peanuts.
Council Tax increases by County and District Councils are capped by Central Government.
Town/Parish precepts can be what the relevant council decides, there is no other control.
We seem to have a council that feels it can spend our money as their vanity dictates.
We have the opportunity to take those councillors to take by attending the Parish Assembly on Tuesday, April 23, 7pm at the Memorial Hall.
We need to ask why we need such extensive work at the Almonry and a new pavilion in the Recreation Ground.
The council states its aim is to support the High Street, so why is it suggesting the town needs a further café and a wedding venue in the Almonry when both services are in existence in the High Street.
No public consultation has taken place for the new pavilion or the Almonry proposals – why not?
Regarding the Almonry, Cllr Furness when pressed at a public gathering on March 16 at the Almonry, promised full details would be set up in the foyer of the Memorial Hall for public viewing – a promise not kept. Why all the secrecy?