Thatcham's Priory facing the axe?
New Conservative-controlled council discusses 'killing' project
THATCHAM’S Conservatives have taken the first steps towards ‘killing’ the restoration of The Priory project, despite work having started.
The Grade-II listed building in Church Lane has long been a contentious issue between the Tories and their Liberal Democrat rivals.
The then Liberal Democrat-controlled town council bought the building from West Berkshire Council for £400,000 in 2009.
The building was valued at £480,000 but was sold on the proviso that the £80k discount should be repaid should the building ever be sold for non-community use.
The Lib Dems wanted to revive the town centre building for community use and to use it as a meeting room for the town council.
A 25-year repayment loan was taken out in 2009 along with £740,000 from the government’s public works loan board to fund the project, while renting the existing town council offices in Brownsfield Road to help pay off the loan.
The Conservatives, however, view the project as a burden to Thatcham tax payers and want to terminate it.
Speaking at the first meeting to discuss the project since taking control of the town council, Roger Croft (Con, Thatcham South and Crookham) said that the Lib Dem’s plan was not economically viable.
He accused the opposition of being ‘liberal with other people’s money’ by taking on £1.1m of debt – equivalent to £110 for every Thatcham household.
“Bearing in mind this is public money, I believe it would be fiscally irresponsible to proceed. We need to examine all the options and rethink the project,” Mr Croft said.
Leader of the Lib Dem opposition Lee Dillon (Thatcham North) said: “The Thatcham vision document called for a community facilty in the heart of Thatcham and the council responded.
“I believe West Berkshire Council supported the scheme and helped to deliver it by selling it to us for a discount.”
Mr Dillon said that elements of the project had been amended following discussions with the Conservatives.
He also noted that Mr Croft and Dominic Boeck (Con, Thatcham South and Crookham) had resigned from the committee dealing with the project.
“If you are going to throw mud then throw it in the committee room where you can add positive suggestions,” Mr Dillon said.
Mr Croft hit back by saying that a lot of the discussions surrounding the project had been held in secret when they should not have been, adding that he did not like the direction the project was heading in.
The committee then heard that the completion date is expected to be in December this year and that there are currently no delays to the works, which includes a council chamber and an extension for disabled toilets.
Councillors were told that £75,000 could be saved from the £740,000 project by removing these features, however, other costs, at around £6,000, would have to be factored in and there would be costs for paying the loan off early.
Mr Dillon pointed out that the committee did not have enough information to proceed as the town council would have to assess the loss of income and having to rent elsewhere.
“As a councillor, voter and resident of Thatcham I don’t know what your plans are for The Priory,” he said.
“I don’t know if you are looking to save costs or looking to shelve the whole idea.
“These plans went out to public consultation and should go back out. That chamber and community room change the nature of that building. I think we are duty-bound to consult again if we remove it.”
Mr Boeck agreed that consultation was probably prudent but the town council was not bound by previous decisions.
Saying that he was uncomfortable with any options regarding the Priory, Mr Croft said the choices facing the committee on the evening were to continue as normal, ‘kill the project’ or defer a decision.
“If we cancelled the contract we would be left with a degenerating Grade-II listed building in the middle of nowhere,” he said. “I suspect we would be sued by the builders.
“Although we have not signed a contract, with letter of intent and work started it would be hard to say there was no contract. It’s an option for the future.”
Jason Collis (Con, Thatcham North) said that ‘doing things piecemeal’ while the future of the entire project hangs in the balance sat uncomfortably with him.
John Chelliah (Con, Thatcham West) said that the work should continue as there would be costs and possible legal issues in cancelling the project.
Despite all the wrangling councillors deferred a decision on The Priory.
And, while saying he disliked the idea, Mr Croft suggested that a task group of select councillors be created to explore options for the project.
