Wivenhoe Town Council precept for 2013
  • In theory, the coalition's Localism Bill, which has bestowed on parish councils the new 'general power of competence' (see above posting) will bring with it additional responsibilities and powers.
    It is therefore surprising to discover the following from the CPALC website. (Communities, Parish and Local Councils, is an independent body that promotes local democracy by supporting all, whether residents, town and parish councillors or parish clerks. )

    http://www.cpalc.org.uk/q-is-there-a-parish-council-watchdog

    Q: IS THERE A PARISH COUNCIL WATCHDOG?

    A:
    Strangely no. All tiers of government, of which parish councils are a
    part, have a process of referral to the Local Government Ombudsman
    except town and parish councils.

    Other than the town or parish
    council itself there is no external body to whom you can complain to
    about a town or parish council. This situation has lead to a rise in the
    number of expensive judicial reviews over the last few years.

    Under
    certain limited circumstances you may complain to the District Auditor
    or the External Auditor if you believe that there has been financial
    mismanagement. The Information Commissioner has powers to ensure that
    town and parish councils comply with the Freedom of information Act by
    holding them in contempt of court.

    CPALC (Communities, Parish and Local Councils) believes that the current situation is unjust.
  • There is also the Principal Authority Monitoring Officer.
    The job amongst other things is

    maintaining
    the register of members’ interests and in practice advising members
    on conduct and conflicts of interest. For Monitoring Officers of
    district and unitary councils, this responsibility extends to parish
    councils within their area.


    But the Local Government Act 2000 reduced the post's significance and it's not much of a watchdog anymore. He no longer has power to report on maladministration or breaches of statutory codes.

    edited to add: there's been more legislation since that time and the MO's powers have been added to again, but not significantly in respect of parishes.
  • Marika - as I understand it the Monitoring Officer can only offer advice to the Town/Parish Council on proper governance procedures, but the council is not obliged to follow it and the Monitoring Officer has no enforcement powers. So it does seem to be that parish councils are the only tier of government that are in this unique position, which as the CPALC says is strange.





  • That's the current position, yes. It's a toothless tiger at parish level.
  • The 2013-14 precept will be discussed and set at tonight's meeting of WTC.

    7:30pm Council Offices, 77, High Street
  • At the Wivenhoe Town Council meeting held on Monday 21st January 2013 the 2013/14 precept was mentioned briefly. However, lengthy discussions prior to this had taken place at the WTC Finance and Administration Committee where budgets for 2013 -14 were discussed and a precept was eventually voted upon and agreed unanimously.

    The headline figure to come out of that meeting was a .37p/week increase on the precept for this coming year, which represents a 32.34% increase on the previous year.
    To put that in context see this previous posting on the yearly increases over recent times:
    http://www.wivenhoeforum.co.uk/discussion/comment/12812#Comment_12812

    This precept increase is subject to final statements coming from Colchester Borough Council due on February 18th, but the expectation is that the WTC precept (our part of the Council Tax) will be set at a 32.34% increase for this coming year.

    The Mayor announced that a newsletter explaining about this precept increase will be sent out to all Wivenhoe households in the near future.

    The Chair of the Finance and Administration Committee, Cllr Neil Lodge, explained after the meeting ended that the committee doesn't meet in public, and so the full range of debate about the precept could not be heard. He explained that such a rule is contained  in WTC's Standing Orders*. Some surprise was expressed about this from members of the public at the meeting. However, Cllr Lodge did pass me the minutes of the Finance and Administration Committee held on the 9th January 2013, and he did give me permission to post them up here (click on attachments below).  The minutes fill in some of the details about the decisions that had to be made and how the final figure was achieved and thanks are due to Cllr Lodge for allowing the forum access to these.

    *The rule that was invoked to exclude the public from the deliberations was actually the Public Bodies Admission to Meetings Act 1960 - Section 1 (2) as minuted in the document attached.
    Here is a link to the relevant passage of the act.
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/8-9/67/section/1


    Minutes of WTC Finance and Admin Cttee_9th Jan 2013_P1.jpg
    1273 x 1754 - 865K
    Minutes of WTC Finance and Admin Cttee_9th Jan 2013_P2.jpg
    1273 x 1754 - 779K
  • For anyone interested in the Standing Orders of Wivenhoe Town Council (which I mentioned in the above posting), I attach a copy of them for reference.

    Many councils publish them on line, but at the present time they don't seem available on WTC's website. They are public documents, and it is considered good practice to make standing orders freely available to residents so they can understand their parish councils procedures.

    Here is a bit more about them:
    http://www.cpalc.org.uk/q-what-are-parish-council-standing-orders


    Standing Orders adopted May12.doc
    888K
  • WTC seem to be the whipping body here. Due to CBC and there reduction of the grant to Wivenhoe being reduced to £500 from £32k they had to organise an income locally to maintain current service levels.
    What options did they have?
    A difficult decision but one that had to be decided upon.
  • Do we get more services or better services than those living in central Colchester?  If so in what way?  If not why do we have to pay more in rates?  I hope the newsletter from the Mayor will explain this.
  • On exclusion from finance meetings, it would often be deemed necessary because personal salaries (e.g. of clerk and groundsmen) would be discussed.


    Though I guess in theory (and at a district level, not necessarily town/parish) the rest could be discussed in public with that part in private?

  • It is interesting to read a document prepared by Isitfair Campaign for the Reform of Council Tax.
    I don't carry a torch for the organisation but they have gathered together a useful amount of information about the precept.

    Particularly enlightening is the part that explains how the nex tier authority can put the squeeze on a Parish Council and we could do worse than keep a beady eye on CBC to make sure they don't aggravate the local situation in any of those ways.
    Town-Parish precepts - Oct 2010.pdf
    21K
  • A re-think from Colchester Borough Council on this coming year's council tax as reported in today's Gazette:

    http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/10177718.Council_tax_set_for_freeze_after_administration_re_think/

    With this news of Colchester Borough Council  doing a U-turn and agreeing to a council tax freeze after all, it is worth looking at UNISON East's view of such freezes. This was posted before on this thread but because of last night's decision by CBC here it is again:
    http://www.unisoneastern.org.uk/news/council-tax-freeze-will-create-budget-black-hole-warns-unison

    Plus a tweet from Essex County Council last night:
    "Our cabinet has today recommended budget plans for 2013/14 that would
    see ECC's share of the council tax frozen for third successive year"

    According to UNISON East's earlier estimates a freeze would mean for Essex County Council a shortfall of £8.724m in the coming year.

    Whether any of this will have an affect on the provisional precept agreed by WTC is unclear - but Marika's posting and attachment above warns of possible consequences for parish councils.
    http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/10177100.Wivenhoe_residents_face_council_tax_hike/?ref=mr


  •  Tweets coming from the Gazette at last night’s CBC meeting
    on Council Tax u-turn:

    "The Freeze is coming from one part of the cabinet”. Labour
    will consider the freeze and report to cabinet mtg tomorrow night.

     Tim Young, Lab cabinet member: “Freeze will leave council
    vulnerable to financial risk in the future.”

  • Contrasting headlines from today's Gazette:


    image
    Gazette headlines_23rd Jan 2013.jpg
    640 x 595 - 376K
  • News of the Essex Police precept in tomorrow's Gazette too...


    [edited to add: http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/10179433.Police_and_crime_commissioner_asks_for_3_5_per_cent_council_tax_increase/


    It's online too!]

  • If I have understood previous contributions to this thread, Wivenhoe Town Council's Finance and Administration Committee met on 9th January, 2013 to discuss the Council Tax precept that the Council aimed to levy in the 2013-2014 financial year. The public was excluded from this meeting under the provisions of the 1960 Act governing admissions to meetings. This Committee's recommendations were endorsed at the meeting of the full Town Council last Monday evening.


    The critical question is whether this meeting of the Finance and Administration Committee was properly summoned. Schedule 12 Section 10 (2) of the Local Government Act 1972 requires that Parish Councils shall give at least three days notice of such meetings to the public and of the business to be transacted at such a meeting. Notice to Councillors alone of such a meeting is not enough. To the best of my knowledge, no one contributing to this thread knew of this meeting of the Finance and Administration Committee or saw any notice of its summoning or of the business to be transacted there.


    The facts therefore need to be established. Was notice of this meeting given to the public? If so, how, where and when? If no such notice was published, the Committee's proceedings, whether in public or private, were invalid and the decisions it made and that the Town Council ratified last Monday were and are unsustainable, I fear.

  • Christopher T - a look at the council's Standing Orders posted here...
    http://www.wivenhoeforum.co.uk/discussion/comment/13244#Comment_13244
    shows that the following is mandatory for both council and committee meetings:

    "Meetings shall be open to the public unless their presence is prejudicial to the public interest by reason of the confidential nature of the business to be transacted or for other special reasons. The public's exclusion from part or all of a meeting shall be by a resolution which shall give reasons for the public's exclusion."

    The resolution that was presumably proposed and passed at the Finance and Administration Committee on 9th January was the Public Bodies Admission to Meetings Act 1960 - Section 1 (2).

    I can see this could be thought necessary in part for the reasons Will Lodge gives in his posting:
    http://www.wivenhoeforum.co.uk/discussion/comment/13272#Comment_13272
    but whether the whole meeting needed to be held in private is quite a question, and it surely is correct, as you say, that notification of the meeting should have been given to residents. I'm not at all sure that it wasn't, although it doesn't appear as a diary date on the council's website. There has been reported some practical issues re. access to the noticeboard http://www.wivenhoeforum.co.uk/discussion/comment/13226#Comment_13226 and this might have been a factor if notification wasn't given, but only an enquiry to the town clerk would give you a definitive answer.
  • Having had a look at WTC's own Standing Orders, they state that committee meetings should be notified to, and open to the public unless a resolution is passed that they shall not be- for reasons that need to be minuted. As far as I know nobody has asked whether such a resolution was passed in the finance committee.

    ChristopherT, subject to the absence of any resolution, you are correct in your observations up to the point where you say that the meeting and everything that flowed from it is invalid because of this suspected procedural impropriety.

    Curiously, even if there was a procedural flaw the decision remains valid unless and until it were annulled or successfully challenged by way of judicial review. I don't know if a mechanism exists whereby the Council can annul its decisions.

    Now, judicial review is prohibitively expensive and the general rule is that the loser pays the costs of a case.
    You wouldn't really want the Council spending rate payers' money on that, would you? Insurance might or might not pick up the tab...

    In any event: what would be the good of any of this, if you consider that the upshot of a successful challenge would probably be: a (this time procedurally correct) re-run of the same thing with probably, given the circumstances, the same outcome?

    Pragmatism is not a dirty word. Let's just say we expect proper procedure to be followed in future.
  • A lot of annoyance today from Eric Pickles, the communities and local government secretary, about how few local councils have frozen council tax this year. The government for the third year in a row have offered a grant (UNISON call it "a bribe") if they do so. But only 115 councils out of 351 in England have said they will freeze council tax as of April this year. Colchester Borough Council was one of those that wasn't going to freeze council tax, but then last week they did a U-turn and joined the minority of councils who are now proposing to do so. The government say that this will be the last year of offering the grant.

    Freezing the council tax, and being given a grant for doing so, may at first glance sound attractive, but it simply hides overall funding cuts from central government. As Sir Merrick Cockell, The Local Government Association chair has said, the plans are short term and undermine the government's commitment to localism. He said "It doesn't address the huge long-term pressures councils are facing including bigger cuts than any other part of the public sector..."
    ref. http://www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/poll/2012/oct/09/council-tax-freeze-poll

    And of course all this has a knock on affect down the tiers of government to parish level where Wivenhoe's share of the council tax (the precept) has had to rocket to 32% to compensate for the massive cuts in funding coming from CBC this year.
  • Edited: to delete - posted in error on wrong thread.
  • A little more from The Graun on Localism in action...
  • CBC has added the Precept and Council Tax Levels Report [PDF] to the previously published Full Council agenda for 20th February.

    £217,458 is confirmed as the Wivenhoe precept for 2013/14. This is compared to £173,360 for the previous financial year, an increase of £44,098 - the highest in the whole Borough.

    The resolutions are a statutory requirement, and so of course will be rubber-stamped by Full Council.

    image
    precept.jpg
    618 x 814 - 153K
  • Some slight confusion over the level of increase for the precept. The data provided above by CBC states a 25% increase. A simple calculation of the figures in the table confirms this.

    WTC however is stating that the precept increase is 32.34%.

    Can anyone clear this confusion up please?
  • I don't know for sure - but could it be something to do with changes to population size (i.e. 25% increase in total amount collected, but per household share it is 32%)?

  • To tie up a loose knot left hanging on this thread...
    http://www.wivenhoeforum.co.uk/discussion/comment/13098#Comment_13098

    The question was posed, has WTC got the 'general power of competence' yet? I was told by Cllr Needham that the answer is no.


  • Here's the national picture on the impact of decreasing precepts:

    "Financial woes are cascading down to the parish and town councils who, only a month back, communities secretary Eric Pickles lauded as localism's "magic wand".

    Take the parishes: one in Cambridgeshire reports that as a result of a reduced council tax base its precept (local tax) will reduce by £19,524. This is the result of central government "localising council tax" – it strikes at the heart of local service funding and there is nothing the parishes can do about it."
  • This thread was picked up again a few days ago by myself (as a new thread) but lost in the outage. I was concerned to see that the Wivenhoe precept was reported as 32.4 on my council tax bill which had increased my monthly payments by a few pounds. The only other items which had been increased were the police (and police commissioners! ) and a small annual charge. There was some discussion about whether WTC had informed residents about this increase and I said that had received no notification or a newsletter to that effect.

    Roger directed me to a couple of links and I said two points were interesting a) the fact that the localism grant being handed out by ward councillors recently had come from the Wivenhoe precept money that had been withheld by CBC so was really not such a generous gift after all; b) in the breakdown of parish precepts shown earlier in this thread some of the categories seemed very vague e g what are 'cultural and related activities' and why isn't there a more detailed breakdown of a very large category called 'other activities. I said that presumably all would be made clear in the WTC audited accounts when they became available. Finally I asked if it was too late for me to apply for a localism grant to cover the cost of the Wivenhoe precept on my council tax bill.

    This is just a resume from memory of what was discussed on the thread which also included comments from Mottza who also indicated that WTC had not let people know about the proposed increase and very helpful comments from Roger.

    I also remarked how annoying it was to have to pay the full amount of CBC council for services which we often did not receive plus the Wivenhoe precept on top for the privilege of living in Wivenhoe.

    Think I've got the gist of this right but I'm sure someone will correct any errors!
  • Just received the newsletter 'Council Tax Facts'. A bit late isn't it. This rather smacks of the banking industry with CBC as the baddies and us poor council tax payers having to make up the shortfall. I hereby register my objection to this enforced contribution to the Wivenhoe precept. If you'd asked me nicely and beforehand I might have said 'yes' but things like this should not just be imposed on residents. I'd also like to see how the figure of 37p per week if you are in in band D has been worked out. I'm only in band B so it should in theory be less?
  • Queenie - here is a bit more information on how decisions were reached on this year's precept increase.
    Minutes of WTC Finance and Admin Cttee_9th Jan 2013_P1.jpg
    1273 x 1754 - 865K
    Minutes of WTC Finance and Admin Cttee_9th Jan 2013_P2.jpg
    1273 x 1754 - 779K
  • Thanks Roger. Difficult to comprehend though. It would be easier if it was laid out as a projected income and expenditure sheet with expected shortfall etc. Plus what steps have been taken to show how expenditure could be reduced under different heads? How does it compare with the previous year? What is going to happen in the future? Are Wivenhoe residents going to be asked to pay even more. Maybe residents should have a say on how money should be spent? Could money be raised in other ways e g a Wivenhoe lottery perhaps? Could the Mayoral Regalia and such unnecessary fripperies be dispensed with. Those heavy chains look ridiculous these days and I am sure that a nice neat badge would suffice. Also do we really still need to have a Mayor's Charity Ball? i know the argument is that it raises funds but to me it smacks of nineteenth century benevolent philanthropy and should have no place in today's society. I'd like to see less events requiring posh frocks? I'm sure these remarks will be unpopular but we are all having to pare back.
  • The December WTC meeting heard how five different budgets were drawn up, ahead of knowing the settlement that would follow in January from CBC:

    http://onionbagblog.com/2012/12/17/pre-christmas-council-capers

    "WTC has drawn up five possible budget scenarios. These have been rated on a scale of 1 – 5. The trick will be to select the most appropriate spending scenario, once the funding levels from higher up the political food chain are known.

    An example was given of the amount of money we’re talking about on Scale 1, the highest budget level. The will involve a precept increase of 40.9% per household, which roughly equates to a rise of around £25 per year.

    Cllr Lodge cast a cautious figure:

    Think about what you might NOT get. We have got some hard decisions to make."

    The recommendations of the Finance Committee were voted through - although not discussed - at the January WTC meeting:

    http://onionbagblog.com/2013/01/22/right-on-the-money-at-wtc

    Cllr Lodge kindly provided the copy of the breakdown of the finances that Roger has shared. Requests to attend future Finance Committee meetings however have been denied.

    The full accounts from WTC are usually published in the Annual Town Report, which should be available ahead of the May Annual Town Meeting.

    As for future precepts? Cllr Lodge has floated the idea that the Health Centre could be paid for by residents through an extra increase in the precept.
  • Cllr lodge like spending our money doesn't he.

    WTC have really tarnished their reputation with the lack of informing residents (most formites said they never received the WTC letter), he handling of the health centre and other goings on.


    queenie I fully agree.
  • With the £500 grant  from CBC not coming to us next year it's probably going to mean a further increase in Wivenhoe's slice of the council tax next year too. Since 2010 there has been a sharp trend upwards.
    See http://www.wivenhoeforum.co.uk/discussion/comment/12812#Comment_12812
    And some of the reason for this is explained here:
    http://www.isitfair.co.uk/Downloads/Town-Parish precepts - Oct 2010.pdf

    re. "Cllr Lodge has floated the idea that the Health Centre could be paid for
    by residents through an extra increase in the precept."

    As far as the Fire Station site is concerned this offer has been rejected by the landowner Charles Gooch. The doctors presented him with the suggestion but he wasn't interested in a straight sale or lease of his land along those lines.
    http://www.wivenhoeforum.co.uk/discussion/comment/14179#Comment_14179
    http://www.wivenhoeforum.co.uk/discussion/comment/14223#Comment_14223
    The shortfall in funding of the Health Centre, caused by Boots no longer wanting to join the scheme, is said to be £30,000 per annum.
  • Fascinating link to isitfair Roger. Astounding that there is no legal cap on parish precepts. I don't mind making a contribution to a specific cause e.g. a new health centre in the form of a (small!) pledge but I am definitely not in favour of having an increased parish precept forced upon me when you have no real guarantee of what the money is being spent on. I want proper facts and figures and to be included in any decision-making process.

    Also these back door increases affect pensioners unfairly particularly when both CBC and ECC have had a zero increase in their bit of the council tax.

    I've a feeling that somewhere somebody should be creating an uproar about the withdrawal of funds by CBC. Hasn't anyone tried to fight this? Is it impossible?
  • The full accounts from WTC are usually published in the Annual Town
    Report, which should be available ahead of the May Annual Town Meeting
    .

    I remember attending a Council meeting (December I think it was) and asking for financial reports to be published with the meeting minutes so that residents could understand how WTC spends its money - with particular reference to CBC's influence on WTC's finances.
    The reply was that doing so every month would put too much strain on the Clerk but that doing so once every three months would be considered.

    It seems that if it was considered at all, it must have been decided not to go ahead with it because I haven't seen anything like a financial report since then.
    Mind you: if they were in the January minutes I wouldn't know because these STILL haven't been published on the WTC website.
    No good moaning here I suppose. Looks like another visit with notified questions on 15 April, then...

  • Wivenhoe and other parishes get a raw deal compared to the unparished parts of Colchester. Looking at the services provided listed in the Council Tax Facts shee,t residents of central Colchester do not have to pay extra for maintenance of playing fields etc.  There is a further way in which we are badly served.  The Council Offices which were presumably owned by Wivenhoe Urban District are now owned by Colchester Borough who charge Wivenhoe to use them (fairly nominal, I believe). The rent on the part used by the Post Office however goes to the Borough and not Wivenhoe Parish. It is odd that the effect of local government reorganisation has meant that Wivenhoe lost ownership of its Council Offices but Elmstead retained ownership of the land opposite Millfields.  Colchester Borough also pockets the monies paid for mooring on the Colne though this perk was a reward for Colchester helping to rebuild Dover Castle.

     I am not sure what the benefits of being a Parish are.  Under the Localism Act all that is needed to draw up a Neighbourhood Plan is a group of 21 residents, similarly for nominating assets of community value; no TownCouncil is needed.   
  • Interesting discussion point poopdecker, and one that was brought up before on the Forum...

    http://www.wivenhoeforum.co.uk/discussion/187/wivenhoe-town-council/p1
  • During another search for the January minutes (yeah, I know - get a life...) I came across this message on the Wivenhoe Encyclopedia, posted 7 March 2013.
    If the original Wivenhoe.gov.uk is to be allocated to the town council I suspect there's a replacement website in the offing...
  • Marika, that's a duff link.
  • Mottza, link now repaired
  • As there is a bit of thread drift here I have started a new thread on the topic of Local Government Transparency.
  • Localism, settlements and political fall out, via The Graun.
  • Unitary local authorities were floated way back at the start of this thread. They seem to be making a comeback under Localism.
  • Now wouldn't it be something if Colchester and Tendring could agree to form a local enterprise partnership (LEP) ... or have I missed something?
  • Parish and Town Council Precepts (Referendums) Bill 2012-13

    On 26th April Kris Hopkins, Conservative MP for Keighley, West Yorkshire, is having a second reading of his Private Members Bill that he has introduced under the Ten Minute Rule.

    A summary:
    A Bill to give effect to Schedule 5 of the Localism Act 2011; to amend
    section 52ZC of the Government Finance Act 1992 (inserted by that
    Schedule) to require parish and town councils to conduct local
    referendums in the event that they choose to increase their precept by 2
    per cent or more in the following financial year; and for connected
    purposes.



    A record of the first reading on the 19th March is here:
    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm130319/debtext/130319-0002.htm#13031966000001

    It should be noted that Ten Minute Rule Bills are often an opportunity for Members to voice an
    opinion on a subject or aspect of existing legislation, rather than a
    serious attempt to get a Bill passed.
    http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/bills/private-members/


  • Its the principle of raising the precept without consultation that matters. It creates a precedent which may allow the council to think that it is OK for it to due this in the future.
  • At least if it got to Second Reading stage it means he was given Government time for it. Could still be talked out then, though.
    Everybody be nice about Mr Pickles, until 26 April...?

    Anyway, it wouldn't change anything for 2013.
  • image
    William-Hague-George-Osbo-007.jpg
    460 x 276 - 101K
  • Very funny!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Wivenhoe Diary
Many thanks to Wivenhoe News for helping to source these dates
1 - 30 April, James Dodds exhibiting at Over the Sofa Gallery, Wivenhoe Bookshop
11 April - 10 May, Jarman's Dungeness, an exhibition by Andy Brooke celebrating Jarman's vision 20 years on, Wivenhoe Library
11 April, Wivenhoe Watching Wildlife Springwatch, Sailing Club, 7:30 - 10pm
12 April, WTFC Vs Thetford Town, Broad Lane, 3pm
12 April, Wivenhoe Ferry Fundraiser, the Sailing Club, 7:30pm - late. Live music from Strings Attached, DJ and curry meal. Tickets £12 from the Bookshop.
13 April, WivGigs, Come and Try day
15 April, Moving Image, Enough Said, William Loveless Hall, 7:30pm
17 and 18 May, Wivenhoe Open Gardens, various locations around the town
17 - 20 April, Beer Festival at the Black Buoy pub; 20 plus guest beers and ciders, food, live music.
19 April, Farmer's Market, Congregational Hall, 9:30 - 12:30pm
19 April, Easter Workshop for children, age 5 - 12, St Mary’s, 2pm - 3:30pm
21 April, WTFC Vs Stanway Rovers, Broad Lane, 3pm
23 April, Italian Literature, start of a five week course with Giovanni Colacicchi, Wivenhoe Bookshop, 2:30 - 4:30pm
23 April, Wivenhoe Film Club, Bicycle Thieves, The Nottage, 7:30pm
24 April, poetrywivenhoe, Allison McVety, The Legion, 8pm
24 April, Funny Farm Comedy Club, Andrew O'Neill, Cricket Club, 8pm
25 April - start of Wild About Wivenhoe month. Various events centred around the Wildlife Garden. Full details to be published... when known!
25 April, Transition Town Wivenhoe Spring Event, open-air bicycle-powered cinema, bar, evening food, all at the Wildlife Garden
26 April, Watching Wivenhoe Wildlife Dawn Chorus Walk, meet at 5am in the train station car park
26 April, Transition Town Wivenhoe Spring Event, Art and Photography Exhibition themed around the Wildlife Garden, William Loveless Hall
26 April, Bird Walk with Richard Allen, Sailing Club, 10am
29 April, Moving Image, All is Lost, William Loveless Hall, 7:30pm
2nd May, Wivenhoe Society Talk, Richard Moulson, CBC Ranger: 'History and Management of Colne Nature Reserve, Wivenhoe Woods and Ferry Marsh, The Nottage, 7:30pm
3 May, WTFC Vs Diss, Broad Lane, 3pm
9 May, Watching Wivenhoe Wildlife, presentations about wildlife in gardens, and gardening for wildlife in Wivenhoe Library, presented by John Rowland, Glyn Evans & Chris Gibson
13 May, Moving Image, Nebraska, William Loveless Hall, 7:30pm
16 May, Shipyard Studios, Inside Out, Keel House, 5 Walter Radcliffe Road, 3pm - 8pm www.shipyardstudios.co.uk
17 - 26 May, Shipyard Studios, Inside Out, Keel House, 5 Walter Radcliffe Road, 10am - 5pm www.shipyardstudios.co.uk
17 May, Watching Wivenhoe Wildlife, Moth Trapping and Bat Watching, Wildlife Garden
18 May, Watching Wivenhoe Wildlife, Moth Trapping - the reveal!
20 May, Moving Image, Saving Mr Banks, William Loveless Hall, 7:30pm
15 June, Watching Wivenhoe Wildlife, Wildflower Walk in the gravel pits behind the cricket club, 11am
29 June, Jazz on the Quay, 1pm