Savings rather than Cuts Ty Pawb

Home Forums Forums Wrexham Forum Savings rather than Cuts Ty Pawb

  • Author
  • #139843


    I would rather save than cut. To this end I would put Ty Pawb into moth balls for the next year.
    This would save the Council subsidising it in the first year of £188k.
    Rent from shops £57,862 retained in Council funds.
    Revenue from car park retained in Council funds £159k
    Staff redundancies saving £60k
    A total saving of £465k.
    The mothballing of Ty Pawb would be a challenge to Cllr Pritchards resolve to at these times of austerity, to at least stand still rather than cut services.


    Council Watcher

    JimBow your thinking is very sound but would undoubtedly fall on deaf ears in the Council- the problem they have is that they have expanded so much Arts Council and WG funding that a retreat is probably not practical or contractually viable.

    When there are people who are driving vanity projects the economic reality does not come into their thinking — there is no risk of being sacked for a project failure, no personal liabilities so no blame to be attributed if it all goes pear shaped


    I don’t think that you have to go as far as this Jim.

    The original reasoning behind the Arts Hub scheme was to replace one of the 3 Markets, the Quarterbridge observations being that 3 Markets were not viable. The idea was to put in place a Hub that would be financially at arm’s length from the Council, sourcing its primary funding from 3rd party bodies like the Arts Council. It was assumed that the central logic of the Arts Hub was Arts provision though the Hub would be coupled with a Market component due to public pressure. A profitable entity was desirable but it was accepted right from the start that the funding formula made it less necessary for profitability to be achieved from the off. Losses would be covered from beyond the Wrexham Rate Payer and not affecting alternative budgets. Because of this, a less profit centred, tailored for the market-place Hub was projected.

    Time, Jim, to ditch that approach. The Hub should hit the ground running and no units should be allowed that do not potentially or actually suggest an instant return. This is already the case where the Market traders are concerned but it should also be the case where the Arts units are as well. No Arts for Arts sake; let the Hub justify itself by its relevance and by its utilisation. This is where there are templates elsewhere and WCBC should be looking at them


    Liz Jackson

    The sourcing of external funding by an organization managing the HUb has now been kicked into touch for at least three years as they have not legally been able to establish the new community entity as originally proposed.

    Haven’t most of the traders now relocated and indicated that they don’t wish to move back. Have the Coucnu got a 100% occupancy planned for the opening — I know someone who has told the Council they are interested in a unit but they have received no details other than “We will let you have details when available”.

    The car parking income originally proposed in the budget is now no more than a pipe dream as the prices have fallen so much.

    I wish there was some positive news on this as issue but it really does seem a doomed millstone for the ratepayers of Wrexham,



    The car parking income originally proposed in the budget is now no more than a pipe dream as the prices have fallen so much.

    Last week I queried with Cllr David Bithell the Lead Member, that the Fourth Street Report advised a charge of £4 for all day parking in Ty Pawb and the recommendation of Cll Bithell was for £2.50 all day.I pointed out that there would be a significant fall in generated income to the Arts Hub.
    His reply was, The Council will support the business case at Ty Pawb.
    Whatever it costs, the Council are hell bent on using rate payers money to get this project off the ground.


    Liz Jackson

    The question to ask the Executive Biard Councillors is how many of them would actually take on the role as Director/Trustee of the Hub if a Charitable Company would be established now.

    No matter what charitable status was used to establish this as a Community entity there is no protection for the Directors/Trustees if they were knowingly trading without the financial means to pay their way. In other words, the Hub was insolvent — each Director, once they reach that point, would personally be liable and be putting their own homes at risk.

    The only way they could continue would be with an open cheque from the Council and the Bank having a form of security to cover the risk.



    My concern is that once the Arts Hub is up & running, that in 3 years time when money is short once again, that they will not decide to close swimming baths, museums & libraries to fund an arts project which is only of interest to a limited group of people.



    I think a better name for it would have been Eliffant Gwyn.

Content is user generated and is not moderated before posting. All content is viewed and used by you at your own risk and does not warrant the accuracy or reliability of any of the information displayed. The views expressed on these Forums and social media are those of the individual contributors.
Complaint? Please use the report post tools or contact .

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.