Oakham Town Council Finance Meeting Explodes Over Transparency, Secret Budgets, and Massive 28% Precept Hike Proposals
A tense and contentious atmosphere dominated the Oakham Town Council Finance Committee meeting last night, as councillors clashed over transparency, administrative overreach, and a proposed budget that threatens a staggering tax increase for local residents.Proceedings got off to a rocky start when Cllr Martin Brookes complained that the vast majority of the agenda items were designated for "information or to note only." Cllr Brookes raised a sharp objection regarding a specific item asking members to note the council's bank statements documents that had not even been provided to members.Despite this glaring omission, the majority of the committee voted to note the item anyway. Only two members quickly looked over the statements and signed them at the end of the meeting.Tensions escalated further when members were barred from discussing a recent incident of banking fraud. Committee Chairman Ben Callaghan made it explicitly clear that he was unhappy with Cllr Brookes for previously sharing information about the banking fraud with the public, telling him "he had no right to do it."Cllr Brookes robustly defended his actions, pointing out that the item had been listed on a public agenda, making it a matter of public record involving public money. He noted he merely wanted to ensure residents knew the council had taken action to resolve the issue. Following the meeting, Cllr Brookes issued a formal statement to Chairman Ben Callaghan:"I want to firmly set the record straight regarding the banking fraud issue you brought up during a public meeting... Had the council required this matter to remain confidential such as to safeguard account details, personal data, or an active police investigation the correct process would have been to make it an exempt agenda item and excluded the press and public under Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. Because this was placed on the open agenda, I have done nothing wrong... This council clearly has an issue with openness and transparency."
The debate turned explosive during discussions surrounding the draft budget for 2027–2028. Although the document was not legally exempt, Locum Clerk Sam Haywood refused to share it with the public and press, citing fears of negative publicity. Objecting strongly to this secrecy, Cllr Brookes handed a copy directly to the press, questioning the Locum Clerk's commitment to openness.Heated arguments followed regarding unauthorised additions to the budget. Cllr Dave Romney questioned line items and additions that the corporate body of the council had never agreed to. When Cllr Brookes supported these points, the Locum Clerk defended the additions by stating it was "not illegal for the council to add things that it might want to do."Cllr Brookes has since challenged this justification, highlighting that individual officers and councillors lack the independent authority to commit public funds or establish budgets for unapproved "wish lists" or vanity projects without a formal mandate from the full council:"The clerk or Responsible Financial Officer (RFO) may draft, calculate, or present financial estimates, forecasts, and draft budgets for the council to consider... However, adding a line item for a new project requires an explicit resolution or mandate from the elected members."
The Locum Clerk stated that a new Youth Addition was included due to a desire from two individuals the council agreed to co-opt at its last full council meeting neither of whom are officially councillors yet because the Locum has not provided co-option forms for them to sign. One of these individuals attended the meeting as a member of the public and objected to discussions touching on past staff errors, though no former staff members were named. Cllr Brookes countered that pointing out past failures is crucial, noting they form the main substance of the council's audit reports and the poor situation the council currently finds itself in.Cllr Brookes also apologised to residents for not paying close enough attention to soaring administrative costs, pointing out that staffing expenses are set to double. Much time was spent discussing Oakham Town Council's poor public reputation. Members drew comparisons to the BBC's "What does the BBC do for you?" campaign, suggesting the town council needs a similar PR push. However, Cllr Brookes noted that a communications working group set up back in May has not met even once, describing it as typical of the council's unfulfilled promises.As the debate neared its close, most members agreed they would be unhappy delivering a budget featuring a 28% increase, favouring a modest 5% rise instead leaving the Locum Clerk with a massive revision task before the next meeting. The next finance committee meets in November to review the draft budget line by line, with all non-committee members invited.As the heated debate wound down, the Locum Clerk dismissed concerns by stating that the financial increase amounted to "peanuts" and that the council should agree to the higher budget if it wanted to move forward rather than remain static.Chairman of the Council Martin Brookes condemned the comment as offensive, arguing that the increase represents real, hard-earned money for local families. While Cllr Ben Callaghan repeatedly argued that "it's only £15 a year," Cllr Brookes slammed the flippant attitude, reminding colleagues of last year's similarly dismissive "cost of a cup of coffee" defence. Cllr Brookes also questioned the councils progress to follow audit recommendations. A prime example of this failure occurred last night when members considered the payment list. The council stubbornly refused to provide a proper, transparent breakdown of a combined payroll payment totalling £25,720.91 for SeptemberCouncillor Brookes states "This opacity is unacceptable, especially given that our own internal audit report explicitly condemns this practice" As stated in the internal audit findings regarding financial controls and payroll compliance"Salaries, taxes, and pensions must be properly itemised and supported by full documentation. Presenting total payroll expenditure as a single lump-sum figure without an itemised breakdown obscures audit trails and fails to meet standard internal control requirements."(Section 4 / Objective G of your AGAR/Internal Auditor's Report)Cllr Brookes says, despite the internal auditor clearly confirming that presenting the payroll in this bundled manner is wrong, the council continues to hide behind lack of detail.The draft 2027–2028 budget figures present a dramatic financial escalation for Oakham taxpayers:Proposed Precept Demand (2027/2028): £394,085Previous Precept (2026/2027): £306,777Cash Increase: £87,308Percentage Increase: 28%Based on 5,878 households, this equates to an average increase of £14.85 per year per household. Band D specific figures from Rutland County Council were not yet released at the time of the meeting.Comparison with Other Rutland ParishesRunning Oakham Town Council is already significantly more expensive than any other town or parish council in Rutland. While smaller rural parishes in Rutland operate on modest precepts ranging from a few hundred to a few thousand pounds, and even neighbouring Uppingham operates on a significantly lower scale, Oakham Town Council stands as an outlier. Because its budget requirement exceeds £140,000, Rutland County Council is legally required to and does publish full line-by-line expenditure breakdowns for Oakham a regulatory threshold that highlights just how vastly superior Oakham's administrative and running costs are compared to every other parish authority in the county.Despite these high costs, residents frequently question what tangible services the town council actually delivers in return.Concluding his remarks, Cllr Martin Brookes, Chairman of the Council, has stated:"I do hope the proposed increase can be drastically reduced and I can not accept we should take money from resident for projects we just might do, we should only take what we need and moving forward we need to start consulting and listening to our residents and I do not believe its is right for the council to create a role in the community if they have not consulted residents on what they want their council to do."
For more local news, community updates, and what's on in the area, visit: https://www.oakhamandrutlandnews.com/Including Market Place, Market Street, Church Street, Crown Walk,John Street, Melton Road and Deans Street and Gaol Street.
Discover Oakham High Street
Discover Oakham
Discover Oakham Northgate Oakham RutlandOakham And Rutland What's On Guide
Rutland Christmas
Oakham and Rutland Sports and Fitness Events News
Stay Connected with LGBTQ+ Gay Oakham Rutland News Events Advice and Support
Road Closures Rutland Highways
Discover Opportunities withOakham And Rutland NewsJob Vacancies Oakham Rutland
Oakham Town Council Finance Meeting Explodes Over Transparency, Secret Budgets, and Massive 28% Precept Hike Proposals
A tense and contentious atmosphere dominated the Oakham Town Council Finance Committee meeting last night, as councillors clashed over transparency, administrative overreach, and a proposed budget that threatens a staggering tax increase for local residents.
Proceedings got off to a rocky start when Cllr Martin Brookes complained that the vast majority of the agenda items were designated for "information or to note only." Cllr Brookes raised a sharp objection regarding a specific item asking members to note the council's bank statements documents that had not even been provided to members.
Despite this glaring omission, the majority of the committee voted to note the item anyway. Only two members quickly looked over the statements and signed them at the end of the meeting.
Tensions escalated further when members were barred from discussing a recent incident of banking fraud. Committee Chairman Ben Callaghan made it explicitly clear that he was unhappy with Cllr Brookes for previously sharing information about the banking fraud with the public, telling him "he had no right to do it."
Cllr Brookes robustly defended his actions, pointing out that the item had been listed on a public agenda, making it a matter of public record involving public money. He noted he merely wanted to ensure residents knew the council had taken action to resolve the issue. Following the meeting, Cllr Brookes issued a formal statement to Chairman Ben Callaghan:
"I want to firmly set the record straight regarding the banking fraud issue you brought up during a public meeting... Had the council required this matter to remain confidential such as to safeguard account details, personal data, or an active police investigation the correct process would have been to make it an exempt agenda item and excluded the press and public under Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. Because this was placed on the open agenda, I have done nothing wrong... This council clearly has an issue with openness and transparency."
The debate turned explosive during discussions surrounding the draft budget for 2027–2028. Although the document was not legally exempt, Locum Clerk Sam Haywood refused to share it with the public and press, citing fears of negative publicity. Objecting strongly to this secrecy, Cllr Brookes handed a copy directly to the press, questioning the Locum Clerk's commitment to openness.
Heated arguments followed regarding unauthorised additions to the budget. Cllr Dave Romney questioned line items and additions that the corporate body of the council had never agreed to. When Cllr Brookes supported these points, the Locum Clerk defended the additions by stating it was "not illegal for the council to add things that it might want to do."
Cllr Brookes has since challenged this justification, highlighting that individual officers and councillors lack the independent authority to commit public funds or establish budgets for unapproved "wish lists" or vanity projects without a formal mandate from the full council:
"The clerk or Responsible Financial Officer (RFO) may draft, calculate, or present financial estimates, forecasts, and draft budgets for the council to consider... However, adding a line item for a new project requires an explicit resolution or mandate from the elected members."
The Locum Clerk stated that a new Youth Addition was included due to a desire from two individuals the council agreed to co-opt at its last full council meeting neither of whom are officially councillors yet because the Locum has not provided co-option forms for them to sign. One of these individuals attended the meeting as a member of the public and objected to discussions touching on past staff errors, though no former staff members were named. Cllr Brookes countered that pointing out past failures is crucial, noting they form the main substance of the council's audit reports and the poor situation the council currently finds itself in.
Cllr Brookes also apologised to residents for not paying close enough attention to soaring administrative costs, pointing out that staffing expenses are set to double. Much time was spent discussing Oakham Town Council's poor public reputation. Members drew comparisons to the BBC's "What does the BBC do for you?" campaign, suggesting the town council needs a similar PR push. However, Cllr Brookes noted that a communications working group set up back in May has not met even once, describing it as typical of the council's unfulfilled promises.
As the debate neared its close, most members agreed they would be unhappy delivering a budget featuring a 28% increase, favouring a modest 5% rise instead leaving the Locum Clerk with a massive revision task before the next meeting. The next finance committee meets in November to review the draft budget line by line, with all non-committee members invited.
As the heated debate wound down, the Locum Clerk dismissed concerns by stating that the financial increase amounted to "peanuts" and that the council should agree to the higher budget if it wanted to move forward rather than remain static.
Chairman of the Council Martin Brookes condemned the comment as offensive, arguing that the increase represents real, hard-earned money for local families. While Cllr Ben Callaghan repeatedly argued that "it's only £15 a year," Cllr Brookes slammed the flippant attitude, reminding colleagues of last year's similarly dismissive "cost of a cup of coffee" defence. Cllr Brookes also questioned the councils progress to follow audit recommendations. A prime example of this failure occurred last night when members considered the payment list. The council stubbornly refused to provide a proper, transparent breakdown of a combined payroll payment totalling £25,720.91 for September
Councillor Brookes states "This opacity is unacceptable, especially given that our own internal audit report explicitly condemns this practice" As stated in the internal audit findings regarding financial controls and payroll compliance
"Salaries, taxes, and pensions must be properly itemised and supported by full documentation. Presenting total payroll expenditure as a single lump-sum figure without an itemised breakdown obscures audit trails and fails to meet standard internal control requirements."
(Section 4 / Objective G of your AGAR/Internal Auditor's Report)
Cllr Brookes says, despite the internal auditor clearly confirming that presenting the payroll in this bundled manner is wrong, the council continues to hide behind lack of detail.
The draft 2027–2028 budget figures present a dramatic financial escalation for Oakham taxpayers:
Proposed Precept Demand (2027/2028): £394,085
Previous Precept (2026/2027): £306,777
Cash Increase: £87,308
Percentage Increase: 28%
Based on 5,878 households, this equates to an average increase of £14.85 per year per household. Band D specific figures from Rutland County Council were not yet released at the time of the meeting.
Comparison with Other Rutland Parishes
Running Oakham Town Council is already significantly more expensive than any other town or parish council in Rutland. While smaller rural parishes in Rutland operate on modest precepts ranging from a few hundred to a few thousand pounds, and even neighbouring Uppingham operates on a significantly lower scale, Oakham Town Council stands as an outlier.
Because its budget requirement exceeds £140,000, Rutland County Council is legally required to and does publish full line-by-line expenditure breakdowns for Oakham a regulatory threshold that highlights just how vastly superior Oakham's administrative and running costs are compared to every other parish authority in the county.
Despite these high costs, residents frequently question what tangible services the town council actually delivers in return.
Concluding his remarks, Cllr Martin Brookes, Chairman of the Council, has stated:
"I do hope the proposed increase can be drastically reduced and I can not accept we should take money from resident for projects we just might do, we should only take what we need and moving forward we need to start consulting and listening to our residents and I do not believe its is right for the council to create a role in the community if they have not consulted residents on what they want their council to do."
For more local news, community updates, and what's on in the area, visit: https://www.oakhamandrutlandnews.com/
Including Market Place, Market Street, Church Street, Crown Walk,
John Street, Melton Road and Deans Street and Gaol Street.
Discover Oakham High Street
Discover Oakham
Discover Oakham Northgate Oakham Rutland
Oakham And Rutland What's On Guide
Rutland Christmas
Oakham and Rutland Sports and Fitness Events News
Stay Connected with LGBTQ+ Gay Oakham Rutland News Events Advice and Support
Road Closures Rutland Highways
Discover Opportunities with
Oakham And Rutland News
Job Vacancies Oakham Rutland
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment
🎉 Comments Are Now Live
You can comment directly on every article at Oakham and Rutland News.
Our mission is to put local voices back at the heart of the conversation. Whether you want to share your thoughts on local news or connect with your neighbours, it’s now easier than ever.
How to Join the Conversation, Just scroll to the bottom of any article. Sign in with your Google account to help us keep the bots away and ensure real discussions. We’ll be moderating to keep the community respectful, friendly, and free of abuse. Your voice matters. Let’s take Oakham and Rutland News to the next level, together.