Community Centre Closure Proposals Thrown Out

Proposals to close local community centres were thrown out today in favour of a fuller review involving all of Wrexham.

Last October Members of the Council requested a further report into how the Council’s Community Asset Review could affect community centres. Currently the review of community assets has been completed for two areas in Wrexham, which include Brymbo, Tanyfron, Bryn Cefn, Pentre Broughton, Brynteg, Gwenfro, New Broughton, Gresford, Marford and Rossett. 12 areas are due to be looked at in total.

There was mention that the committee had intended to review them all at the same time.

Speaking of the Council’s information, Cllr David Kelly said: “This leaves us a little like a cleft stick. When the report comes back it was due to be the entire report, but due to timescales and budgetary scales we are now dealing with it on a piecemeal basis.”

Lawrence Isted, the head of community and wellbeing and development, said that the overall asset review would inform the Community Centre Reviews, and that it was desirable for all to be discussed today. He added in the future all will be discussed in the same way.

After further discussion about the reports, crossovers and why only two areas had been done, Chairman Cllr Kelly said “I am quite confused about if we are at work in isolation or in parallel.”

Cllr Malcolm King assured the committee that the report is part of an overall review process and not the reported ‘D-Day for Community Centres’.

Cllr King said: “If we are to make sense of all resources we have and diminishing resources with the £34million of cuts we have to make, and the size of these cuts will continue to grow, and it’s with that background we need to look at this.

“People need to go to one place to get a range of resources and information rather than have it spread it around.

“The aim is we can share resources such as administrators and caretakers, so we have more money to put into front line services.

“Reviewing a couple of thousand buildings has not been as fast as I had wanted to. It is important to do it carefully and meeting with local members to get their local knowledge and to build on that.

“No final recommendations have been made about any community centre.”

Cllr King noted there are still preliminary recommendations along with the necessity of meeting with the affected groups.

Speaking on behalf of Marford Community Centre, Beryl Blackmore spoke of the inaccuracies in the report. Mentioning the crux of the argument about shared use of single resources she warned the meeting that moving services to other resources would not work, saying that pubs would not be suitable venues for playgroups.

The meeting were handed over 600 letters that had been collected in the last five days from Marford residents requesting not to close the centre.

After the address, the meeting was reminded that no closures would be taking place as no decision had been made. Instead the review recommendations could been seen as ‘a stimulus to debate’.

Cllr Alan Edwards recommended the board does not accept the report, requesting the Officers report back when details are available on all community centres.

Cllr Mike Edwards spoke of his support for Marford Community Centre, and warned “This may not be D-Day for community centres but D-Day was planned in secret and known to the public only the day after it happened.”

Cllr David Griffiths fired back “There is nothing being done in secret”.

Cllr Mike Edwards explained how he had received letters from 95 people in one week regarding the situation in one week, and had since been in touch with a group who are willing to take the centre over. It was requested the Council “Instruct Officers to negotiate with a local organisation who can run it at a zero cost to the Council. ”

Cllr Alun Jenkins said it is essential to have an asset review, however he said he was disappointed the resources are not there to do it quicker. “Today we were due to have a community centre review but it has turned into an asset review.”

“We should not make decisions on single centres until we have discussed them all

“To have the recommendation that we support the closure of two today is dealing with it in a piecemeal basis, which we were not going to do.”

Laurence Isted said: “We have the looming tsunami of the £34 million of savings to be made but members will have to make a choice between one highly valued thing and another highly valued thing.

“The asset review will not be complete for around 18 months but we need to make decisions on this sooner.”

Andrew Bailey compared the meeting to Dunkirk rather than D-Day for community Centres. He also queried why Marford was ‘red’ on disability access, he was told it was a result that “The ramp is not compliment, nor is the fire escape.”

The meeting had an air of confusion at times, with some Councillors keen to speak out against the formal recommendations for closure that were contained in the report, with others debating if a discussion ought to occur with the full information on all centres- and if that discussion entered the realms of asset review or the community centre review.

The feeling that trusts operating Community Centres was preferred by the Council, which was spoken about by Laurence Isted.

Cllr Kelly asked if that was a process would the Council give the land and buildings to the trusts or groups, and if so, would that mean no rents for the Council therefore impacting on income.

Such a suggestion that the Council could look to spin out the running and maintenance of the Centers was met with the comment by a Council Officer saying “That’s a sensible way forward. The pressure on the Council is not capital, it is revenue.”

Cllr Geoff Lowe revisited the World War 2 theme, giving a mini history lesson on D-Day and Dunkirk saying “Dunkirk was us dipping our toe in then retreating to a safe position to rethink our strategy, and I think that is what will happen today. I am not satisfied the consultation has been as good as it should have been”

Nearly two hours later members were asked if they support the initial recommendations in the report, and no one did.

Only one motion was put forward, as asked for earlier in the meeting, that the committee wished to see all the information before debating it, asking for suitable community provisions, capital receipts and looking if there can be development of trusts or groups to take over the running of centres.

Cllr Kelly was keen to try and avoid any new motions referring to ‘capital receipts’ and the like, as if that was the case it would come under ‘Part 2’. Which in reality means it will be discussed in privately and away from the public and press.

The report proposed is likely to be a two part report, so some elements will be public and some will be private.

Cllr Lowe summed it up saying “There has been some sense come out of today, and now have a way forward.”

It is worth adding that today was a Scrutiny Committee, and the outcome from today is a fair bit different from its starting point. Scrutiny in action!

The debate has been ongoing on this Wrexham.com Forum Thread!