2025 Meetings

NORTH SCARLE ANNUAL PARISH MEETING

Minutes of the Meeting held on

21 May 2025 at 7.00pm in the Village Hall

Cllr David Jennings welcomed everyone to the meeting.

10 parishioners attended the meeting.

The Minutes of the Annual Parish Meeting held on 16 May 2024 were signed as a true record.

Councillor Jennings read out his Report for 2024/25

From a passing look North Scarle is a quiet village that has remained fairly stable for a number of years with only a few planning applications, We do however have some large businesses within the parish and also a couple of large caravan sites. Also with several properties as holiday lets we cater well with employment and tourists.

All these take a toll on our roads and in this context I would like to thank LCC Highways for all the work they have done in the parish. It is much appreciated.

Planning has caused the occasional problem as the plans provided have details missing or are ambiguous and actual locations\ are sometimes difficult to pinpoint. It should also be pointed out that in winter we have a very high water table and deep soak aways are not adequate.

Fortunately this year we just escaped the trauma of flooding of properties and it will be pleasing if not a miracle when Mill Dam Dyke is properly maintained. It would seem that the Environment Agency would rather spend money on surveys and unnecessarily cutting grass rather than proper maintenance. I would however like to thank FANS(Flood Action North Scarle) for their continuing hard but frustrating work to resolve this problem.

We have an Emergency Planning committee whose remit includes flooding and I thank them for producing a comprehensive ‘Emergency Plan’. Unfortunately two members are leaving the village and we need volunteers to fill those positions.

The Heritage Room has and continues to cause anxiety as its footprint in the building has reduced over the years and our financial support does not reflect this. As we are not allowed to support a private business a proposal has been made to reduce support.

As always we have received help from residents in many guises, from reporting problems, delivering our magazine, North Scarle Matters, to removing fallen trees from our roads. To all those involved many thanks for your contribution.

My thanks also to our previous County Councillor Alan Briggs and our District Councillors Chris Goldson and Richard Johnston for their support throughout the year.

I would also like to thank all Parish Councillors for your contribution and support through the year. Sue in particular for continuing her hard and progressive work as Chair of the Sewerage Working Party.

Most importantly to me a big thank you to our Clerk, Hayley, for her help, advice and occasionally putting me straight in matters Parish Council. Being able to discuss some problems through the year has been very useful and sometimes enlightening. Thank you.

Finally our County Councillor Alan Briggs unfortunately lost his position but we look forward to working with his successor, Alan Woodruff.

Also this month has also seen the resignation of two Parish Councillors for personal reasons and I hope they will be replaced soon.

Parish Councillor Susan Walsh reported on the Banks Charity Trust which is registered with the Charity Commission

There are four trustees of the Banks Charity

Reverend Canon Andrew Vaughan, by virtue of office

Mrs Josie Worrell

Mrs Charlene Dixon

Mrs Susan Walsh appointed by the Parish Council

It is actually The Charity of Hirgo Badger and others:

In 1701, Hirgo Badger bequeathed one house and garden, a close of approximately 4 acres and one close of approximately 11 acres and five pounds ‘to the use of the poor of North Scarle forever.’

The house which became derelict was condemned by the District Council in 1936 and subsequently in 1967 was demolished. The land was sold in 1968 for £425 and the money received was invested in shares of the Charities Official Investment Fund for which investment dividends are received quarterly.

The Banks Charity still holds the assets of the land, which is in the form of two fields, and these are rented out.

Joseph Banks donated £100 in 1827.

At one time the Charity Commissioners required the charity be distributed as gifts of coal or clothing. It was then interpreted that gifts to the poor should be noted as gifts to persons who are in conditions of need, hardship or distress. The Charity is to help parishioners who have fallen on hard times due to, for example, illness or unemployment.

Since our last report given by myself with a balance of £19,461.01 on 25/03/2024

Income is:

Rent in £1,100

Interest and dividends £595.75

Wayleave rental £28.54

Expenditure

Bank charges £27.50

Monies donated for families in hardship £1,200

Balance to 20 April 2025 is £19,957.80

Report on the Playing Field

No one was present to provide a report.

North Kesteven District Council – Annual Report

Cllr Chris Goldson read out the report, as follows:

The year has been a challenging one we are anticipated a number of difficulties and concerns for the future.

North Kesteven Council has managed a prudent financial regime and entered 2025 with provision for a stable and reliable financial future. Accepting the vagaries of external impacts (political & financial).

By 31st March 2026 all councils will be legally obliged to provide and use a food waste bin (not another bin we hear you cry!), this will be collected weekly. 

Overall, jointly, or at least one of us, have tried to attend all the Parish Council meetings throughout the year to contribute, advise and support wherever we can. This will obviously continue.

A number of communities in our Ward have experienced ongoing impacts with recent flooding, many of which remain unresolved: despite considerable efforts from residents and councillors. Inter-agency collaborations leave a lot to be desired.

House building continues over the whole of North Kesteven, NKDC follow the Central Lincs Local Plan and various Neighbourhood Planning criteria. The growing impact of Solar Farms will inevitably affect our Ward directly, with projects adjacent to our village environs. All will have our focus and involvement; some however will only be on an advisory basis- those over 50MW are National Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) Permission for these rests with the Government and Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero. This also applies to the new Anglia Water Reservoir proposal in the South of the County. 2025 will see major changes in our community structures with the new elected Mayor for a Greater Lincolnshire Combined County Authority (GLCC) which consolidates transport, adult skills (budget responsibility from 2026), homes and communities, economic growth, and the environment. 

Also, over the coming years, 2026 onwards there are likely to be MAJOR changes with Local Government Re-organisation (LGR). As you may be aware, despite expressions of collaboration and common discussion, disappointingly, most County, District & City Councils have developed their own submissions to Government. On balance we feel that NKDC’s combined submission meets most of the Government guidelines. However, the final decision is not ours. What is apparent is the dissolution of the & District councils & significant reductions in representative Councillors. Not, we feel, necessarily in the best interests of our residents and contrary to the idea of closer representation!

Given all of that, we, as Independent Councillors, will continue to represent the best interests of our residents devoid of any ‘party affiliations or political bias.

We wish all our Parishes success in their local community projects and initiatives and an improving one within their future expectations.

Regards

Councillors Richard Johnston & Chris Goldson for

Skellingthorpe, Eagle & Swineshead, North Scarle & Doddington & Whisby.

Lincolnshire County Council

Cllr Alan Woodruff introduced himself as the newly elected County Councillor. First full meeting will be on 23rd May.  He is aware of flooding issues and has asked for information, one of his first jobs will be to look into it.

Questions/comments:

From parishioner:

The layby outside the bungalows on South Scarle Lane is being used by people who don’t live in those bungalows. The bungalows belong to NKDC.

Answer:

The layby is not allocated to the bungalows as private parking therefore can be used by anyone, but LCC Cllr will look into it and the possibility of having it allocated as private parking.

From parishioner:

Who is responsible for cutting the grass outside the Council owned bungalows on South Scarle Lane as it is a mess?

Answer:

Presumably NKDC is responsible as they own the bungalows but Clerk will check and follow up.

From parishioner:

Eagle Road resurfacing is uneven.

Answer:

This has already been reported to LCC but the information will be provided to LCC Cllr for him to follow up.

From parishioner:

Planning on Spalford Road 25/0511/FUL. How can she find the details of the application?

Answer:

The planning reference was provided so that they could contact NKDC.  NKDC Cllr said that this was not a straightforward planning application and it was due to be discussed by their planning committee.

Heritage Room:

This discussion point was moved from the full PC meeting (which was inquorate) to this meeting so that parishioners who had attended for this reason could speak.

Cllr David Jennings opened the discussion by providing a report on behalf of the Parish Council:

It is not our intention to close the Post Office but as a Parish Council we cannot financially support a private business.  We can however support the Heritage Room side of the building and it is the proportion of use by the Heritage Room that is causing the problem.

The building was originally acquired by NKDC following agreements set up by Barbara Wells, a previous Clerk and a North Kesteven District Councillor.

This provided an ideal solution as the Parish Council took on the lease of the building from NKDC to open as a Heritage Room to be shared with the Post Office because the old Post Office was closing down.

Costs were reasonable and the rent was only £1. These costs were split 50/50 with the Post Office.

However in 2020 NKDC decided to charge a commercial rent for the building this being £1250 annually and split 50/50.  It is also a repairing lease and we as a Parish Council are responsible for all repairs which have been considerable for such a small building.

Over time the area taken by the shop side of the Post Office has increased and utility costs have risen considerably due to installed equipment but again are still split 50/50.

To keep the status quo we suggested putting further shelving units in but this idea was dismissed by the Postmistress.

With a view to reflecting the increased costs of the Post Office business compared to the area and use by the Heritage Room we approached the Postmistress, suggesting a meeting to discuss the matter. This was turned down.

A proposed revised split was then put to the Postmistress to reflect the current usage by the Heritage Room:

Annual rent to be split Parish Council 25%  Post Office 75%

Utilities to be split Parish Council 10%  Post Office 90% bearing in mind the Heritage Room will use very little utilities.

The reply stated that their Post Office business could not afford these changes and will probably have to close. If that happened we would lobby the Post Office with a strong case for keeping it.

This is the dilemma we face but we must consider the Legislation for Parish Councils and the advice given by the Lincolnshire Association of Local Councils, is:

“As Councillors we can be held accountable for our actions. A council must do what the law requires it to do. A council may do only what the law says it may do. A council cannot do anything unless it is allowed by legislation. The crucial question is: does the council have the authority, set out in law, to do what it wants to do? This question is crucial if the council is to make a lawful decision to act, especially if it involves

spending money.

Whilst the Parish Council can pay for the village to have a Heritage Room, it can’t keep the Heritage Room open purely for it to remain open to house the Post Office. An individual person (ie the postmistress) cannot benefit from the public money held by the Parish Council.”

In response to our consultation, we have had 45 correct replies, approximately 15% of the enquiries issued and not all of whom wish to support the Heritage Room.  The majority of comments received refer to the Post Office but not all were willing to pay towards the Heritage Room to help keep the Post Office.

We have a decision to make and an earlier discussion with the current Postmistress could possibly have helped with a compromise.  We as Parish Councillors are residents and we also want to keep the Post Office.

The following comments are not verbatim:

Tom Loakes comments:

The area of the shop hasn’t increased.

Didn’t mind the extra shelving but they would obstruct access.

Turned down a meeting due to time constraints and thought email would be a better way to communicate.

Agrees utilities have become more expensive.

Jules pays utilities from her salary.

Business would be unviable if they agreed to PC’s proposed change in percentage split.

What would be impact on Council Tax?

Answer: Would depend on the rate set by NKDC at the time, but the more precept we ask for the higher the Council Tax would be.

Parishioner comment: our precept is low. Others are over £100,000.

Answer: different Council’s have different responsibilities.

Council question: are parishioners happy to pay more to keep the HR open or are you actually concerned about the PO? If we could move the HR room (to village hall for instance) and therefore not pay rent would that be better?

Parishioner comment: we don’t put enough into the village and PC are always asking for people to volunteer.

Council comment: fed up with parishioners moaning about the Parish Council on Facebook, saying we are rubbish, accused of paying for the village hall roof which isn’t true. Saying we don’t spend money. People criticise the PC but are not prepared to help.

Council comment: Post Office equipment is using a lot of electricity, HR uses none. Door is always open when the heating is on. 

Answer: the heating is never on.

Chairman commented that he was convinced our proposed figures of percentage split were a fair split.

Parishioner comment: why were the recent HR/PO expenses so high?

Answer: new doors.

Parishioner comment: what are your current costs?

Tom Loakes answer: £1,200 per year average

Council answer: Our expenses are more because we also pay for repairs and health and safety. Contract wasn’t negotiated – NKDC said “take it or leave it”. We have kept the PO going but now that costs are increasing we have to look at a change. Our previous lease was also a repairing lease but NKDC have only applied this element and the H&S element since the new lease, so this has increased expenses too.

Tom Loakes comment: wouldn’t be able to take on the lease themselves. Spoken to PO who have said they would be willing to keep our PO open following recommendations and training etc. for new staff if needed.

Some confusion amongst parishioners, asking why the PC want to move the PO and not understanding that the shop and PO are one entity and the HR is a separate entity.

Tom Loakes comment: Shop turns over enough money to pay for utilities. Rent and shop is supported by Jules’s salary.

NKDC comment: there’s a conflict between desire of residents to have a PO facility and the PC’s dilemma of not being able to provide a subsidy to a private enterprise. The PC can’t use the precept to subsidise the PO.  Needs to be a fair division of the costs.

Tom Loakes comment: He quoted an old letter which states that according to regulation the PC can contribute 50%.

Council comment: The 50% doesn’t form part of the legislation and was the PC’s suggested amount.

Some conversation about whether the room could be used for other things – the school and meetings – but not practical mainly due to space, lack of seating and limits due to fire safety. Toilet is also only to be used by Jules, as per the Legionella risk assessment.

Council comment: Comments made confirm that the PO is benefitting from money held by PC.

Chairman thanked everyone for attending and closed the meeting at 8.29pm