Affording the swimming pool of despair

Cllr Ursell was going on about a the front page of the previous months Lovely Moon. He said:

"Call me cynical. Is it just a coincidance that the "Lovely Moon" publication blaming HDC (which is Conservative controlled) came out just before the election especially as the editor is Ted Bruning who I suspect is the the same Ted Bruning who was standing for town council in Eynesbury Ward as a Liberal Democrat canditate. If it is true then no wonder the article was biased against HDC. Its deplorable that, if true, a Liberal democrat candidate should try and mislead the general public by this sort of election tactic."

In this months Lovely Moon there is an article quoting  Cllr Ursell. Cllr Ursell is standing for Town Coucil elections on 9th June 2011. The article is below:

What Cllr Ursell does say does raise one question. How will a new open air swimming pool actually be self-sufficient? With £1.75 million in the bank their shouldn't be much to worry about. Once all the construction costs have been taken out there won't be much left. According to Cllr Ursell the old Outdoor Swimming Pool lost £30,000 a year. In truth all pools lose money and need public subsidy in one measure or another. People won't pay the actual cost of swimming.

Eversholt which has an open air swimming pool relies on fundraising to keep the pool open. In financial terms there are a few points to consider:

1. Renewal. The pool will need renewing or a major overhaul in roughly 20 years. If it cost say £1 million to construct this would mean a pool would need roughly £2 million in 20 years time, if not more.

So a "financially self-sufficient" pool needs to put £100,000 a year aside for renewal. 

2. £1.75 million seems alot of money. Take a million off for contruction and the trust is left with £750,000. With interest of 5% this would bring in £37,500 a year. Just enough to cover the losses.

3. The old pool was seasonal. Opening up the pool for the whole year brings with it higher staffing costs, management and utilities not to mention higher costs of maintenance. 

4. What else could the Trust do? There is an idea of a wave machine that surfers could use. But how much profit would a machine like this actually bring in? I have no idea. Nor, I suspect, does Cllr Ursell or the Trust. There have been hints of having a gym. But this won't make any money. 

Whatever the outcome any outdoor swimming pool would need public subsidy to make it a going concern. Either subsidise the running costs or put money aside for pool renewal. £1.75 million sounds alot of money but it isn't. To make this pool self sufficient the amount needs to be closer to £5 million rather than £1.75 million. As with the titchy cinema St Neots will end up with a paddling pool.

Trying to get out from the swimming pool of despair

I see from the front page of the Hunts Post the Swimming Pool Trust has decided to sell the land at the old swimming pool site for £1.75 million for retirement flats to McCarthy and Stone for approximately £1.75 million.

Good. This is the only way forward for the swimming pool trust. Without substantial reserves the only course of action from the swimming pool trust was to go down this route.

What is disappointing is that only 6 of the 17 members of the Swimming Pool Trust were able to make this meeting. All the current Town Councillors (except Steve van de Kerkhove) are members of the trust.

But the money isn't in the bank yet! Whilst a report to HDC says it won't claim half the proceeds, HDC can always change its mind.

As for all the talk about wave machines or flow riders this should be taken with a pinch of salt. The replacement pool is far away from completion. The idea to put this at Rivermead will encounter massive problems with local residents. The use of Brickhills could solve this.

All this just before the elections are held.

Barry Chapman (Conservative) tries to put a fast one.

Of course it would be feasible to put the pool back on the site. But where is Barry Chapman going to get all the money for rebuilding the pool on the old site?

At election time shouldn't the Conservatives be singing from the same hymn sheet rather than two different ones. Cllr Ursell is talking about a new swimming pool. His colleague Cllr Barry Chapman says it is unlikely to be built. Conservatives please make up your minds.

Freedom of Information and HDC

I've been pursing HDC over a secret report over the Outdoor Swimming Pool land which the trust deed said HDC was entitled to half the proceeds. Eventually this has been mainly successful. Not without a few refusals along the way.

The initial request was just blocked. The HDC reply to my request is below:

3rd December 2009

You also requested a copy of the report that went to the head of Legal and Estates regarding the disposal of the former St Neots Outdoor Pool by the St Neots Swimming Pool Trust.

Your request for information has been considered and I am not obliged to supply the information you have requested.

The report was submitted to Cabinet as "exempt information" under paragraphs 3 and 5 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, and as such is not in the public domain.

Paragraph 3 relates to "Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)" and paragraph 5 to "Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings".

This report is exempt under Section 42 (1) and Section 43 (2) of the Freedom of Information Act.

This exemption applies because releasing this report would damage the commercial interests of the Council as there is still a possibility of the disposal going ahead in the future.

This letter acts as a Refusal Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act.

I then appealed and received a redacted report. This can be found here.

After the revelation that St Neots Swimming Pool Trust was liable to give HDC half the proceeds I proceeded with another Freedom of Information request. The new version of the report is here with less redactions.

So what are the differences?

Version 1

Version 2

All this is informing me what was reported in the Annual Accounts of the Swimming Pool Trust. What was so secret about all this even before the latest accounts were published?

Version 1

Version 2

Now this is the really secret part of the report. But I don't see why any of this needs to be kept secret? It is good news for St Neots and the Conservatives. HDC is doing something good for the people of St Neots and yet HDC hides this information! Why?

Version 1

Version 2

This entire minute was redacted by the Freedom of Information team. Why? It seems former decisions back in 1993 are now to be redacted in full. Is this because I could put a FOI request in for this report!

The only losers in this could be the people of St Neots. All kept secret until after the event.

What was kept redacted?

The reason for this being kept redacted is:
Please find attached the report within which sections 2.5 and 2.6 have been redacted (i.e. blanked out). This request is exempt under Section 42 (1) of FOI act. The Council does not consider it in the public’s interest to release thisinformation.

Section 42 (1) is about legal privilege. It is an exemption that has to be measured against public's interest. What Huntingdonshire District Council is saying is it isn't in the public's interest to know what the legal advice is. But if we don't know what the advice is how are we supposed to have a debate about it!

The only reason for maintaining this exemption is the District Council intends to pursue the Town Council/Swimming Pool Trust. Then again why would they do so?

Secrecy in Huntingdonshire District Council is just so ingrained. What has to be so secret about dealings with a Town Council administered Swimming Pool Trust which has members who are also District Councillors. Only the public is being excluded from something that the public has and will pay for in one way or another.

Go on HDC publish the whole report!

Filling the pool of despair

I have received an answer to the Freedom of Information request I put into Huntingdonshire District Council over a secret report to a meeting of Cabinet on 31st January 2008. The whole report with the redacted part can be found here.

The interesting part is this:

The terms provisionally agreed are these:

HDC forgoes taking half the proceeds. The interest from the money HDC gets is to be given back to the project the Swimming Pool Trust comes up with. All this was known in January 2008. So why couldn't the residents of St Neots be told of this back then?

Unless HDC changes its mind, the swimming pool trust will get virtually all the money one way or another. Good news for St Neots!

And that is the crux of all this. This is good news for St Neots. It is also good news for the Conservatives. So why keep all this secret?

The only answer I can think of is the District Council wanted to screw the trust for money. This seems ridiculous because all the St Neots District Councillors should be privy to this information in the secret minutes. Again, why keep all this secret?

Swimming Pool Trust annual return still overdue

I see from the Charity Commissions website the St Neots Swimming Pool Trust is still overdue.

Of course this has nothing to do with the Town Council which has been bunged Quality Status by CPALC. Apart from the fact that St Neots Town Council administers the Swimming Pool Trust and charges the trust for this privilege, the Swimming Pool Trust has nothing to do with the Town Council. Oh and all the Town Councillors, bar Steve van de Kerkhove, are Trustees.

This body is charged with getting an outdoor swimming pool for St Neots and it can't even get this simple document into the Charity Commission. They can even do it online. If the income to the charity is £25,000 or under accounts aren't needed. The Annual Return is required. They have had 10 months to prepare the accounts and still can't get their collective acts together.

UPDATE


I see the Town Council/Swimming Pool Trust have finally sent the Annual Return into the Charity Commission. Still 29 days late!

Gurgling in the pool of despair

I sent an email to both Ian Bates (Leader of HDC) and David Monks (Chief Executive - £139,000 pay off) emails asking what the position is of HDC over taking half the money from the St Neots Swimming Pool Trust. 

Dear Sir,

In the recently published accounts of the St Neots Swimming Pool Trust no 270074 there is a statement that says Huntingdonshire District Council is entitled to half the money from a proceeds from the sale of the land owned in Huntingdon Street, St Neots. I would like to know the District Councils position on whether it intends to enforce this agreement and take half the proceeds?

I received this reply:

Dear Mr Gadenne,

I refer to your email below and understand that you sent a similar query to Mr Bates, the Leader of the Council. They have asked me to send a response on behalf of the Council.

There are no redevelopment proposals for the site currently before the Council and in such circumstances it is not possible to provide a definitive answer to what is, at the present time, a hypothetical  question. It would not be appropriate for the Council to purport to bind or pre-empt a decision of the Council in the future. If and when a request is received by the Council regarding the Agreement, it will be considered on its merits and the Council’s course of action will depend on the circumstances prevailing at the time.

I trust you understand why it is not possible to be more definitive at this time.

Yours sincerely,

Colin Meadowcroft

Monitoring Officer and

Head of Law Property and Governance

Huntingdonshire District Council

01480 388021

Reading the "Council speak" this seems to me HDC feels it is entitled to half the proceeds of the sale. I was actually asking what the position on whether it intends to take half the proceeds. This is the standard line for trying to put an issue down. I received a reply which effectively means the situation isn't resolved. HDC may or may not try to enforce this agreement.

Of course the Council does have a position on this. It is just blacked out.

Whilst not resolving this it does seem to leave a large question mark over the amount of money the Swimming Pool Trust may receive after HDC takes half.

Article on the swimming pool in Hunts Post

The Hunts Post St Neots - 09/02/2011 digital edition

The Hunts Post has a very good large article on the future of the outdoor swimming pool. There is not guarantee that this will go ahead. Until the money is in the bank (trust deed says half the money has to go to HDC) and all disputes are resolved the Town Council/SNSPT don't know what to do.

The original way of funding the swimming pool was a mixture of public funding and local fundraising. All coming together to achieve an aim for the Town. Now we rely on the Town Council/SNSPT to get their acts together to provide a facility in Riversmead. This is not a good location.

Priory Park would be a good location to put this facility. With the Town Council looking to give up land at Shady Walk so why not in Priory Park? 

What Paul Davis, Friends of Priory Park, misses is the swimming pool land has already been the subject of a Development brief which allowed encroachment of Priory Park. Putting a care home on the site would therefore be easy, in outline. Putting a new swimming pool on the site is not financially viable. The money needing to be raised is large and will effectively stop this development in its tracks.

Leopards can't change their spots.....

......and the St Neots Swimming Pool Trust accounts/annual report are always late!

The St Neots Swimming Pool Trust is run by the Town Council although the Town Council insists it is separate. The Town Council run the administration and charges the Trust for the privilege. The contact address is in the same building. The Town Council charges for grass cutting. All the Trustees are Town Councillors. The Town Council is the custodian trustee.

The reporting limit for accounts has been raised to £25,000 of Income. This means the Town Council/SNSPT  doesn't need to provide accounts to the Charity Commission going on income levels from previous years. What does the Town Council/SNSPT need to inform the Charity Commission?

The Annual Return asks for Income and Expenditure totals, the details of Trustees and the details of the Trust. Pretty simple and can be doe online. No accounts are submitted.

Yet again, the St Neots Swimming Pool Trust has failed to get official documents in on time! This is the same Trust that is supposed to be trusted in getting an open air swimming pool for St Neots. Hardly likely!

Plunging into the pool of despair

The Charity Commission has sent me a copy of the 2009 accounts (361 days late). This document can be found here.

The accounts show one large piece of expenditure for £9,776 for professional fees. Probably to do with the negotiations over the sale of the land to the developers of the site including Huntingdonshire Regional College before the plug was pulled by the previous Labour Government. Otherwise SNSPT had £68,677 in cash at the bank.

One aspect worries me and that over half the proceeds from the sale goes to HDC.

I looked up the previous set of accounts to find that this wasn't even mentioned in the 2008 accounts. There we have it. Martin Land and his announcement that the trust was going to get £1.75 million is wrong. The figure after HDC is paid off the £28,859 ad all the fees and legal bills will give the trust just over £800,000. Not much to build a pool with!


This must have been known before! So why wasn't this agreement in the previous accounts? The agreement was made in 1987.

Is £800,000 enough to build a swimming pool? Probably not. St Neots is going to be stuck with a Swimming Pool Charity with about £870,000 of cash but can't afford to build a swimming pool!

The Swimming Pool Trust is an unaccountable body which is taking decisions over a major project for the Town. Why aren't the public informed of the details? When I asked for a report to HDC Cabinet I eventually received a redacted report after appeal. I just have to wonder whether the redacted bit of the report contained the half goes to HDC. Secrecy and yet more secrecy.

Swimming Pool Trust 361 Days late in filing their accounts

The St Neots Swimming Pool Trust on which all Town Councillors are Trustees have finally got their accounts into the Charity Commission. Although officially not part of the Town Council, the Trust is administered by the Town Council who charge the Trust a fee for this privilege. To put this into context, the charity had 10 months from the year end - 31st March 2009 - to get these accounts in. The Swimming Pool Trust took nearly 1 year and 10 months

This is not the first time the Trust has gotten its accounts in late. The record stands at 423 days. In the previous financial year ending 31st March 2008, the Trust were 290 days late.

And this is the Trust that is charged with delivering a new Open Air Swimming Pool. The Trust has the old swimming pool site under offer at £1.75 million. The sale has yet to go through so don't count the chickens on this one. I've requested the accounts and hope to see if there is an explanation to their lateness.

Changes in Charity Commission rules means that from 1st April 2009 Charities under £25,000 income are not required to file accounts. They do have to put in an Annual Return.

Promise is only fulfilled when swimming pool is built

In a rush of excitement by the Hunts Liberal Democrats website there is an announcement they have fulfilled an election promise over the open air swimming pool.

This is very premature. To fulfil the promise shouldn't the pool be built and opened? Yes it should! All they have done is chosen a preferred buyer. Like any land purchase this is going to take a long time and may not be fruitful. 


Liberal Democrat Town Councillor Derek Giles has been very vocal in predicting when a new swimming pool would be built. He predicted a pool would be open in the summer of 2009. Doesn't look likely in Summer 2011
either.

Time for a reality check here. The proposed land at Riversmead is not that big. A smaller pool could be fitted onto this site. But what of the residents. Unlike the previous site Riversmead has many residents backing onto this land. It may sound good but all these residents are going to have their lives disrupted by the noise and traffic generated by this facility.

Where is the car parking going to go? I pity the poor residents who will find on high days and holidays their peace disturbed. I feel this is the wrong location for an open air swimming pool. SNSPT needs to find somewhere else fulfil the promise.

Latest on the Accounts/Annual Return saga.

Pool Plan Takes Shape?

The Hunts Post St Neots - 22/12/2010

So SNSPT may get £1.75 million for the sale of the old swimming pool site. I say may because until it is in the bank the money isn't there. With a build cost of £1.25 million and £500,000 for investment to help pay for the running of the pool. Unfortunately, I feel the £500,000 won't be enough to keep the pool running. A pool will need public subsidy to keep open.

It is obvious that Martin Land is jumping the gun by announcing the amount the preferred bidder has made. This should come from the Town Council/Town Councillors not the paid help. Whilst this is welcome news, the money isn't in the bank.

Corkscrewing in the swimming pool of despair!

As ever with the swimming pool trust the questions go unanswered. Back at the Annual Town Meeting I asked the following question:

The answer I got from Cllr Ursell (Chairman of SNSPT)was:

Not the answer to the question at all. They focussed on the £1,980 and I was asking about returns and accounts. I therefore asked a supplementary about why the accounts and annual return were 4 months late? The answer I got from Cllr Ursell was he would look into it. I thought then that he didn't know.

6 months on and I get into a clash on the St Neots Community Forum. This was about the cemetery. I took the opportunity to ask Cllr Ursell about the swimming pool trust and the late accounts.

Cllr Ursell answered:

Now I find that very strange because Cllr Ursell didn't inform me of this when I asked the original question at the Annual Town Meeting when the accounts and annual report were 4 months late.
I therefore replied with this:

I have yet to receive a reply. Is this why they are being so quiet? Cllr Ursell either knew why the accounts were late and didn't answer the question or he didn't know. As Chairman of the St Neots Swimming Pool Trust he should have known!

This leads me onto another question I asked at the Annual Town Meeting:

This is the answer I got back then:

So according to Cllr Ursell the Swimming Pool Trust has no money. Except when I take a look at the Annual Accounts for 2007/08 I find the following:

Less any accruals leaves a bank account balance of:

So when is £53,435 in the bank - no money?

Buried in the Pool of despair

The one thing that struck me when looking at the accounts of the Town Council and the Swimming Pool Trust is the lack of demolition. Now, the problem with the land at the former swimming pool site could be the fact the old swimming pool is still there but buried. This will cause great problems with any development as the old swimming pool will have to be dug up. This will cause any land valuation and any potential buyer a problem and will mean they will pay much less than the going rate.

Why? Because digging up the pool is an unknown quantity. What is below the ground is not fully known and may bring forth a few surprises. The land could be contaminated. Anyway digging a massive hole in the middle of any development could cause problems with whatever is built on the land.

Could St Neots Swimming Pool Trust be in the invidious position of having the land but can't sell it for much money? This would trash any idea of having an Open Air Swimming Pool and would leave the Swimming Pool Trust with a bit of money and nowhere to go.

Time the Swimming Pool Trust came clean with what is going on!

Will the Conservatives build a new outdoor pool?

New piece of evidence for a new pool comes from the St Neots Conservative website.

285 days and still counting...

So who is to blame for not getting these accounts/annual return into the Charity Commissions in time? According to the Charity Commission website these are the culprits:

MR DEREK GILES - Town Councillor and ex District Councillor
MR ANDREW BOULTON - Ex Town Councillor - in December 2008. Shouldn't be on the list.
MRS JENNIFER BIRD - Town Councillor. Leader of the Conservatives on the Town Council.
MRS BRENDA ARNOLD - Town Councillor
MR ROBERT EATON - Town Councillor and ex District Councillor
MRS KENDAL COOPER  - Town Councillor and District Councillor
JULIA HAYWARD - Town Councillor. Leader of Town Council Liberal Democrats
MRS DIANA COLLINS - Town Councillor
MR LESLIE ROBERTS - Town Councillor
DAVID HARTY - Town, District and County Councillor - County Cabinet member for Learning
MR PAUL URSELL - Town and District Councillor
MS FIONA BIRKS - Ex Town Councillor - should have lost this position when she resign in March.
MR BARRY CHAPMAN - Town Councillor and District Councillor
MRS LEIGH OTTOLANGUI - Town Councillor
MR ALAN CUMMINGS - Town Councillor and Deputy Mayor
MR GORDON THORPE - Town Councillor, District Councillor and Town Mayor
MR JUSTIN COOPER-MARSH - Town Councillor
MR DOUGLAS TERRY - Town Councillor
Steve van de Kerkhove - Town Councillor and District Councillor since January 2009.
Oliver Reynalds - Town Councillor since May 2010. Should be a Trustee but cannot confirm this.

All the above, except Oliver Reynalds as I cannot confirm he is now a Trustee and Andrew Boulton who resigned in 2008, are all jointly and severally liable for getting these accounts and annual report into the Charity Commissioners. They had 10 months. They are 285 days overdue the 10 months. If the Town Councillors are running this Swimming Pool trust in this way, just think how badly they are running the rest of the Town Council!

The Town Council says it doesn't administer the Swimming Pool Trust and that it is separate. Legally the Town Council and Swimming Pool Trust are separate. They are also recognised as a related party because they have so much in common.

Time the Town Council and the Swimming Pool Trust got their respective acts together and not only publish 2008/09 Accounts but the 2009/10 Accounts which are due in January 2011.

Eversholt has an open air swimming pool. Why not St Neots?

Whilst researching the last article about the St Neots Swimming Pool Trust I came across another Swimming Pool Trust. This one is at the village of Eversholt - population 420. Like SNSPT this swimming pool is run by a charity. Unlike the SNSPT this is run by residents rather than Councillors.

The other major difference is: The Eversholt charity got their accounts/annual reports in on time. Unlike the SNSPT, where the Town Council runs the administration, and the accounts/annual reports are invariably late.

In the accounts the Eversholt pool doesn't rely on public subsidy. It relies on raising the money itself.

A basic outdoor swimming pool isn't out of reach of the SNSPT/Town Council. The best idea is to attach an open air swimming pool to a new community facility on the new development.

Time for a swim?

The St Neots Swimming Pool Trust has put the old swimming pool site land up for sale. Residents will have to wait for the Trust to inform the people of St Neots the outcome.

With the land up for sale, the Secretive Swimming Pool Trust has some way to go to build an open air swimming pool. The object of the charity is to:

There have been a few ideas of what to do with the money. There was an idea to have a splash area for kids. But this isn't a swimming pool. There is an idea to have a gym next to the swimming pool. But there is a £2.9 million gym at the Leisure Centre. So why have another Council gym?

That is the problem. The Outdoor Swimming Pool will not run without public subsidy. The SNSPT/Town Council are looking at ways to make this swimming pool run at a "profit". What is this idea that these type of facilities should actually run at a "profit"? Parks don't. Children's Play Areas don't. Why should a swimming pool?

Sometimes Public facilities require public subsidy. There is nothing wrong in that. That is a function of local government.

There is always the question of who administers the Swimming Pool Trust. In an answer to a question I was informed by Cllr Thorpe, The Town Mayor, that:

But in the last accounts filed SNSPT says:

So I'm informed by the Town Mayor that the Town Council does NOT administer the Swimming Pool Trust but I'm informed by the Swimming Pool Trust that the administration is run by the Town Council. DOH! No wonder the Town Council is in a mess. The same people run the Town Council as run the SNSPT.

Why is this charity so secret? It is not as though the charity doesn't have any money. The charity could have a basic website. In 2008 it had £53,435 in the bank. Therefore there is no reason to withhold information as SNSPT has enough money to set a basic website.

The problem with all this is the Town Council and SNSPT are getting themselves into a right mess over what to do with the proceeds of the sale of land. This could end up with the money just sitting there or wasted on something the Town doesn't need. Councils are good at doing this. What is needed is a proper viable plan to provide a basic outdoor swimming pool for the summer months with no frills that the community can use.

233 days overdue

I have to wonder what our Town Council/St Neots Swimming Pool Trust is up too. All the Trustees are Town Councillors.

4 months on from raising this at the Annual Town Town Meeting.

233 Days (8 months) after the accounts/return should have been made.

18 months - A year and a half - after the year end the Town Council.

The Town Council/SNSPT has still to get the Annual Accounts for 2008/09.

There is no excuse for this. SNSPT is trying to sell the old swimming pool site. How are the residents supposed have confidence in the Town Council/SNSPT when they can't even the the basics right!

204 days and counting

The St Neots Swimming Pool Trust is a registered charity charged with providing another outside swimming pool. To do this the Trust will sell the old swimming pool site. This will mean the Trust will have lots of money to play with.

The Trustees should be the Town Councillors of St Neots Town Council. Therefore all the Town Councillors are Trustees who have are jointly and severally liable for running of the Swimming Pool Trust.

The administration of the Trust is subcontracted to St Neots Town Council. The Town Council also cuts the grass and maintains the enclosed space.

Why can't the Town Councillors and the Town Council get their respective acts together over filing the basic information with the Charity Commissioners?

This is not the only time the Town Councillors have missed these legal deadlines.

The main question has to be: Are the Town Councillors up to the job? The answer has to be NO!