Council makes £429,000 profit on parking charges

8:39am Thursday 25th October 2012 in News Photograph of the Author By Cadisha Brown

Price hike fury: Michael de Groot who is fighting increases in parking charges. Buy this photo 441237L at kidderminstershuttle.co.uk/pictures or by calling 01562 633333. Buy this photo » Price hike fury: Michael de Groot who is fighting increases in parking charges. Buy this photo 441237L at kidderminstershuttle.co.uk/pictures or by calling 01562 633333.

SHOCK figures have revealed Wyre Forest District Council raked in a hefty £1.4 million from its car parks in the district in just a year.

The revelation will raise further questions about the latest controversial price hike which came into force on October 1.

The authority made the gross income, which included a staggering £947,591 from parking meters, for the year 2011-12. The sum included £72,613 from parking fines in car parks and £94,726 from on-street enforcement fines.

A substantial amount also came from staff and members’ car parking passes (£72,420), senior citizens’ concessionary passes (£9,067), season tickets (£120,853), rents (£600) and management fees (£117,605).

That gave the council a profit of £429,875 for 2011-12 – £100,000 more than 2009-10 but £33,000 less than it collected in 2010-2011.

Conservative councillor Marcus Hart, the district council’s cabinet member for environmental services, defended the figures and explained that any surplus income the council made was reinvested into council services.

“It doesn’t disappear into some black hole,” he told The Shuttle.

The figures were revealed after a Freedom ofInformation request from Shuttle reader Michael de Groot, who was angered by the hike in parking charges earlier thismonth.

The figures will come as a shock to residents and local traders fearful of how the rise will affect shops in Kidderminster, Stourport and Bewdley.

Many fear it will lead to people avoiding car parks in the district and a subsequent downturn in trade.

Mr de Groot, of Stourport, who has set up a petition in a bid to get the latest increase overturned, said: “I had no idea that the income was so big.

“The actual income for all car parks is nearly £1.5million.It’s still leaving the council with a very handsome profit of £430,000.

“If the council is making that much from car parking then why do we need the increase? They don’t need to increase the car park charges – they are making more than enough money fromcar parks.”

Mr Hart explained there was no increase in parking charges in October last year following a car parking review.

“There’s effectively been a halt until this October,” he said. “The increases that came into effect on October 1 were approved as part of the budget-setting process in February.”

He added the district council was “significantly” increasing the amount of free parking in the district throughout the Christmas period this year.

People can sign Mr de Groot’s petition online at change.org/petitions/ stop-carpark-charge-increase-inwyre-forest

Comments(45)

Graphical says...
9:21am Thu 25 Oct 12

It is not "surplus income" it is PROFIT and the Council should not use our money to make a profit from us.

Report this post »

Skijumper says...
9:29am Thu 25 Oct 12

So how about a reduction in charges for everyone's benefit.

Report this post »

John Campion says...
10:51am Thu 25 Oct 12

Ironically, the photograph shows a non district owned car park, where the private owner sets the charges.

The surplus made from car parking is used to help deliver services. To not make a surplus, would mean services elsewhere would have to be cut.

We have taken steps to trial two days free parking in each of the town centres from the middle of November through till mid January.

There is action to help support the town centres in Wyre forest, but there isn't a quick fix. Mr deGroots actions whilst I'm sure well intended I don't believe help promote the towns in the District. We have agreed £1m investment into supporting the economy locally, and this is a cross party project. We need to fix the underlying issues that affect our town centres, not the superficial outcomes.

Report this post »

Graphical says...
11:08am Thu 25 Oct 12

I repeat, it's not a surplus. It's a profit made from providing a service. That profit is then ploughed into barmy schemes such as unwanted Council headquarters and Leisure Centres.

Report this post »

Bluenose182 says...
11:17am Thu 25 Oct 12

Marcus Hart is talking out of his backside!! Lets talk facts, shops are empty in town and still having made £429000.00 clear profit, our council still put the price of parking a car up. Can you Mr Hart see why these shops are closing down, when in my eyes the council with high buisness rates and high parking costs for shoppers are driving the shopkeeper that we have, and future traders away.
Merry Hill is 30 mins away, free parking, every shop that you need and it's all under on roof and the council put the parking up, are the council trying to drive all the towns customers up there?
Let's face it, we are all paying for the Icelandic banking mess up, so Mr Hart this money will disappear into a blackhole.

Report this post »

kidderlord says...
12:31pm Thu 25 Oct 12

Once again residents of Wyre Forest are being conned by a disgraceful dictatorship that runs Wyre Forest DC. The council tax is collected to pay for services which are not self financing, such as grass cutting, refuse services etc, some of which raise revenue anyway, such as recycling. To MAKE A PROFIT - YES CAMPION, PROFIT - from one service like car parking to pay for others is a disgrace, especially when
the service being paid for is not adequate or value for money.
What next, cemetary charges to be increased to raise funds for play schemes, taxi fares and licensing to be increased to pay for Campions new desk in the carbuncle along Stourport road - by the way I hope he does not use the leaders office to conduct business as the Portfolio holder at County Hall- perhaps someone should ask that question! Roll on 2014 when local residents have the chance to finally oust this shower of shame!

Report this post »

kidderlord says...
12:34pm Thu 25 Oct 12

And be careful about the photo above - it was the fault of the photographer from the shuttle who arranged the photo shoot that it was taken there, and you don't want to upset the Shuttle, your own fan club in the area.
And anyway, you do receive revenue from this car park because business rates are paid for on the car park by the owners. Secondly, perhaps to encourage shoppers you could help subsidise the charges in this area.

Report this post »

Red Flag Dan says...
12:36pm Thu 25 Oct 12

"A substantial amount also came from staff and members’ car parking passes (£72,420)".

Can anyone clarify this? Is that a notional figure?

We know that members (councillors) have been issued with free parking passes, but did WFDC actually bill itself for this?

Do WFDC staff have to pay for passes?

Will the figure of £72,420 make up part of the £500K p/a in 'savings' that the new Council HQ is supposed to bring.

Are councillors still being offered parking passes now that they hold their meetings in a new building which has plenty of free car park spaces?

Report this post »

Shibdrift says...
1:23pm Thu 25 Oct 12

Nothing compared to how much Dunelm could make at £40 a pop!!!

Report this post »

Cynical Sid says...
2:45pm Thu 25 Oct 12

If people actually paid for their tickets there would be none of this!! Dont put the argument forward that if it was free more people would visit the town centre. Its going to take a lot more than free parking to attract folk into that Ghetto they call Kidderminster. The place needs an industrial sized jet wash and some luck!

Report this post »

Mary79 says...
4:04pm Thu 25 Oct 12

"We have agreed £1m investment into supporting the economy locally, and this is a cross party project. We need to fix the underlying issues that affect our town centres, not the superficial outcomes"
out of town hq, out of town leisure centre, car parking charges up.
so what is that million being spent on exactly? parking charges are not 'superficial', they do actually impact ordinary people and decisions we make about where to shop which then affect the town centre and traders. read the last bit slowly wfdc.

Report this post »

Dave Donut says...
5:13pm Thu 25 Oct 12

The most scandalous aspect of it is that it must cost nearly £1m to operate the car parks!!!

Would someone explain where all that money goes?

Report this post »

neilhar says...
6:14pm Thu 25 Oct 12

"Mr Hart explained there was no increase in parking charges in October last year following a car parking review."

@Mr Hart: How Blo dy dare you!! There WAS an increase last year. YOU had it brought forward from October to April for some spurious reason.

This is a LIE! Pure and simple. You arrogant liar. Please desist from lying to us again and again. We are tired of it.

By the way Mr De Groot. I wish you good luck in your campaign but would like to ask where you were two years ago when I and many others fought this lying councillor over parking? Both free status in many and general charges. This is the 4th increase in those two years.

Report this post »

neilhar says...
6:27pm Thu 25 Oct 12

Stunned now I have read the comments, including Kim Jong Campion's. Supporting the town centres my hairy a..e! As already said above, an Headquarters (Tenko) so far out of Kidderminster it is in Stourport & a new leisure centre in the most inaccessible and congested part of the district.

Buffoons, the lot of 'em. As for the opposition? Pointless, outnumbered or not. All of them.

I shall ask once again. When is someone going to grow some balls and call the actions and manner of this administration's rule in?

THERE IS NO DEMOCRACY IN WYRE FOREST!

And guess what Kidderlord, I know exactly what will happen in 2014. I doubt very much if it will play out as you hope. Don't forget the opportunity to dump them at county in 2013 yet I can call that too. A strengthened mandate to carry on...

Report this post »

kidderlord says...
8:31pm Thu 25 Oct 12

sadly neil you are correct - the tories do have a bigger majority at county hall to overturn than district, and possibly by 2014 residents in wfdc area will have forgotten clees dismaneanours, Campions arrogance, and the cabinets ignorance of local needs.
Whilst people like oborski and dyke prop them up and support them in return for committee chairs and appointments like the sfaety partnership chair, the fight is bigger than ever.Still perhaps once oborski has hsd her day as chairman, an out and out bribe, she too will wake up and smell the foul tasting poisonous coffee served up by Campion and Co.

Report this post »

DOEPUBLIC says...
4:25am Fri 26 Oct 12

Does this FOI now mean the full business plan can be disclosed to the public? Or will the charade continue.
25%profit, yet still not enough.

Report this post »

hardworkingdad says...
11:17am Fri 26 Oct 12

I totally agree and have aired my views to the councillors concerned, why is merry hill full to bursting every day at every hour, the answer is free parking, why in the 1980's were the towns full of people putting money into the ecconomy, free parking, here we have the answer, the councillors concerned stated that the money is spent on flowers and street furniture, do we need a thriving district and ecconomy or do we need flowers and new street furniture. Failing libriary numbers families will not pay to park and visit the library. They need to wake up and smell the coffee we are in the biggest recession in a decade. dont just reduce the fees scrap them and give our district a chance to survive.

Report this post »

BewdleyBugle says...
1:14pm Fri 26 Oct 12

Wow. Even by the normally low standards of comment on this site, these plumb new depths. One councillor accused of being an arrogant liar and another of receiving a bribe. How long will the Shuttle allow these people to comment with impunity I wonder? It hardly sets decent standards for political discussion.

Report this post »

kidderlord says...
5:49pm Fri 26 Oct 12

perhaps bribe is not the right word....she was offered the chair in return for supporting the tories...please find a better word for me thanks

Report this post »

Mrs C Wass says...
10:05am Sat 27 Oct 12

Yes Mr Campion, the council may not own the car park - bit does receive a management fees l

Report this post »

Mrs C Wass says...
10:17am Sat 27 Oct 12

Yes Mr Campion, the council may not own the car park shown: but does receive management fee looking after it plus imposed the fines of cars parked inappropriately! Not a strong argument there!

Reinvestment needs concentration on attracting business to empty shop units in town and further central town redevelopment. Therefore increasing employment.


There needs reinvestment back in youth services as there will be rising abs again and rising police costs (where there is lower funding!)

The lack of funding to the central Leisure centre which is due to be shut soon may result in an increase of cardiovascular disease etc and thus oncreasing health costs!

Report this post »

kidderlord says...
11:02am Sat 27 Oct 12

MY APOLOGIES - DELETE BRIBE AND INSERT INCENTIVE.

Report this post »

neilhar says...
6:28pm Sat 27 Oct 12

I wont take back lie or, quite frankly, arrogant. He is. I have dealt with him; personally, in writing and watched in chamber. It is a perfect description. In between eating sweets with his mate and sniggering like an 8yr old girl that is.

It always plays out like this only this time, Marcus himsielf moved the planned October 2012 rise in parkign charges forward to April. I forget the reason. But it is was the hike in prices agreed in the February budget. The archive paperwork will show it was intended to be implemented in October 2012. As always. Implementation used ot be April, but then votes went against unpopluar decisions that same May.

An October implementation date means the rises (in whichever service cost) go through unnoticed. By May everyone has forgotten and nobody pays attention to the Feb budget talks anyway.

also, I cannot be expected to take seriously anyone who defends this administration and the cabal that runs it. The catalogue of errors and lies is plain for the simplest of people to see, even if they need a nudge to look toward local politics first.

Report this post »

DOEPUBLIC says...
2:46am Sun 28 Oct 12

So the reality is that services are propped up by calculated profits from car parking. A community charge rise for one particular community.

Report this post »

BewdleyBugle says...
8:35am Sun 28 Oct 12

The Daily Telegraph this year listed all councils and their car parking surplus/profit - Wyre Forest came 190 out of 349 authorities: http://bit.ly/LDer8a


DfT guidance to Local Authorities states that "Authorities should never use parking charges just to raise revenue or as a local tax. However, where the demand for parking is high, the delivery of transport objectives with realistic demand management prices for parking may result in surplus income. In such cases local authorities must ensure that any on-street revenue not used for enforcement is used for legitimate
purposes only and that its main use is to improve, by whatever means,
transport provision in the area so that road users benefit." bit.ly/ThtQJ6

Report this post »

stayingaliveuk says...
11:51am Sun 28 Oct 12

Ah, that was my mistake, suggesting weaver's wharf for the photo. Interestingly in the first article where I had my photo taken, there were notices all over the ticket machine by Wyre Forest DC, listing the car park increase, due on the 1st October. So interesting then that the car park isn't owned by WFDC?

And in response to Mr. Campion's comments. Regeneration I know has to be a blend of many different initiatives.

The fact remains that an initiative to increase car parking charges is a planned activity to raise more money for the council, instead of an initiative of regeneration.

The fact that this is identified in your strategy document as "low risk and high impact", suggests to me that this is an easy target for the council to raise more funds.

Introducing free parking from 4pm, from November, is great although I doubt many will be able to take advantage of it. I am not sure that a lot of mothers will have the ability to rush to the shops late afternoon, when all the kids get home from school.

It would have been a better idea to start it during half-term, at least they would have been able to make use of it for a while.

I am sure nothing will be done, but at least we've been able to expose some of the disconnected thinking inside the council.

Michael de Groot
@stayingaliveuk

Report this post »

Gobby Robby says...
6:59pm Sun 28 Oct 12

Anyone wondering why someone posting on here would be so outraged that Councillors have been insulted and have a working knowledge of council by laws should take into account that BewdleyBugle has been accused before of being none other than discredited Councillor Stephen Clee. It wasn't by me & i'm not saying it is, but it's an interesting accusation :-)

Report this post »

DOEPUBLIC says...
8:04pm Sun 28 Oct 12

So are you saying Bewdley Bugle that
'Conservative councillor Marcus Hart, the district council’s cabinet member for environmental services, defended the figures and explained that any surplus income the council made was reinvested into council services'
is not a valid statement in this context.

Report this post »

BewdleyBugle says...
8:48am Mon 29 Oct 12

I honestly thought that providing some additional evidence to the debate might help to raise the discussion above the normal level of personal attacks - how foolish of me.

If you took the time to look at the information (readily available on the internet without requiring the knowledge and expertise of a 'discredited' councillor) you would see that there is plenty to consider. For example, while Wyre Forest makes a profit (or surplus, I don't much care which word you use), it does not look excessive in terms of other councils. More important, perhaps, is the way in which any profit is spent - I'd be interested to know the council's answer to that.

It really isn't surprising that only a handful of usual suspects populate the comments on this website, given the levels of personal vindictiveness. I've posted a handful of times, and already the conspiracy theories have started.

Report this post »

FlipC - The Mad Ranter says...
9:25am Mon 29 Oct 12

@BewdleyBugle - "while Wyre Forest makes a profit..., it does not look excessive in terms of other councils"

That's the 'but everyone else is doing it' non-defence. But yes given the information you've provided earlier what the council is doing with the surplus is of importance.

With regard to JC's comment about not owning the Weavers Wharf site; that does seem disingenuous as it is the council who sets the tariffs; in this instance the question would be who gets to keep the money.

Also on a secondary note - on a council owned car-park fines are issued by and on behalf of the council with additional legal force of the law behind them. If the council merely manage the Wharf site then any tickets issued are accredited the same level of protection as any other private firms and are simply invoices. If this isn't the case it's council 'owned' if it not do the fines issued make this clear or do they (illegally?) purport to be from and on behalf of the council?

Report this post »

Gobby Robby says...
2:02pm Mon 29 Oct 12

People only get personal attacks if they say something offensive or, as is usual, make a personal attack themselves. In fact Stephen, err sorry BewdleyBugle, does the same here berating people as 'the usual suspects' & for people being 'vindictive'. Earlier S...BewdleyBugle says 'How long will the Shuttle allow these people to comment with impunity'. So basically he wants to end freedom of speech and dissent, nothing to do with the recent revelations on here of a discredited Councillor I wonder?

Report this post »

DOEPUBLIC says...
4:53pm Mon 29 Oct 12

Was that an answer go my question?

Report this post »

DOEPUBLIC says...
4:54pm Mon 29 Oct 12

To my

Report this post »

Mr.Fie says...
6:06pm Mon 29 Oct 12

@Bewdley Bugle, Im hardly a usual suspect after not long registering on here due to my ever increasing anger with regards to local policies. I find your comments insulting, talking down to the readership here from your high horse. As for raising the conversation politicaly with evidence this is a local newspaper comment section for the general public, where do you think you are? As a local resident, business owner and tax payer i do not support nearly every decission this council is making, and this is a prime example. They'll plough on regardless though and say we were consulted. Democracy????

Report this post »

Gobby Robby says...
6:10pm Mon 29 Oct 12

Mine? No it was a response to Bewdley Bugle who I accept probably isn't the Councillor concerned. Although I did google him and, surprise surprise, I found a Shuttle article where BewdleyBugle enters the debate just to make an unwarranted attack on Stephen Brown. In response another poster has a go at BB for unnecessary berating of an individual! What were you saying about personal attacks BB? ;-) Carry on folks.....

Report this post »

Shibdrift says...
8:33pm Mon 29 Oct 12

And still the pointless drivel from all these muppets goes on!!
Wake up, get out and see what real people want doing!!! Isn't that what you were voted in for.
Not even worth the pencil mark, never mind the paper!!!!

Report this post »

Gobby Robby says...
10:17pm Mon 29 Oct 12

Although you will always get quite a few inane posters like Shibdrift but that's the internet for you ;-)

Report this post »

BewdleyBugle says...
7:14am Tue 30 Oct 12

Mr Fie: apologies if you thought I was calling you a usual suspect when you are not. I am also a local resident, business owner and taxpayer, and certainly not a Conservative. But I do think it a bit odd to argue against people using evidence in these discussions - how else should we form our opinions?

Gobby Robby: your google powers are weak old man (or possibly selective). You don't mention my criticism of Mark Garnier or the Leisure Centre move in other posts. From memory (my google powers are even weaker), I think I pointed out that Steve Brown was a local authority trade unionist. You might regard this as an unwarranted attack, but I thought it was relevant to the Library debate.

Report this post »

Graphical says...
9:30am Tue 30 Oct 12

Seem to have drifted way off point with the usual suspects trying to prove how clever they aren't.......again..
.

Report this post »

stayingaliveuk says...
9:59am Tue 30 Oct 12

Its amazing how Wyre Forest DC is able to generate so much anger amongst its residents. It shows to me that their public facing marketing leaves a lot to be desired.

I appreciate that these discussions tend to go off topic, when the commentators don't agree and share personal comments.

This campaign is never meant to generate personal insults.

The actions by WFDC is actually showing up a very serious disconnect between the council and its residents.

When attending public meetings hosted by WFDC on regeneration and localism, I noticed how few people actually attend.

So without input and commitment from its residents, we are leaving it up to the councillors to make decisions on our behalf, when most of the time they will be driving political preferences to the front.

Its very clear to me that they do not represent their residents properly and have very personal ambitions and outcomes.

Its great to have the massive ambitions of regeneration for the area and its a massive failing when its not carried through into the small but very public actions.

Car park charges are a very public issue and the strategy on this has lost my confidence in WFDC completely.

I know most of you will say, we could have told you that, but I did give the council the benefit of doubt in appearing sincere and caring about the local area.

Its obviously not the case.

Not many people are even bothering to sign the petition, which further proves that residents believe that things won't really change. I think they may well be correct.

Petition Link: http://styin.me/WtPD
lh

Report this post »

Stephen Brown says...
2:04pm Tue 30 Oct 12

1. I would like to know exactly what council services this £429k is 're-invested' in?
2. And where things are at with the £1 million 'investment' money for the local economy?

To echo other comments on here - car parking charges are an important issue to local people. You cannot divorce it from the impact people feel the charges have on their visiting our town centres, or how traders feel on how it affects their business.

Our town centres are struggling and car parking charges are not helping and may actually be aiding the decline. It will take a lot more to revitalise our town centres but doing something about parking charges is a start. Unfortunately, our council feels a Christmas period parking gesture is enough, but it isn't. The only positive is that this gesture does recognise they do actually think charges have an impact. So why not go further?

Report this post »

Jerome K says...
4:42pm Tue 30 Oct 12

People aren't signing the petition because they're comletely apathetic.

Report this post »

Mr.Fie says...
5:57pm Tue 30 Oct 12

Its because people know our Democracy is pretty much a Sham, Save Kidderminster Hospital? Stop School Closures? Etc.. Does it ever work? Plans and decissions are formed behind closed doors by people with other agendas before any one even has a say. I vote and take the time to sign various petitions and comment on articles and I can say no one in power at the moment Represents me!

Report this post »

Gobby Robby says...
10:32pm Tue 30 Oct 12

It's always been the same.
In the mean time, has anyone seen Baldwinian?

Report this post »

Shibdrift says...
12:45pm Wed 31 Oct 12

Mr Fie is right. No-one listens as long as they have their comfy offices and chairs.

Gobby Robby - Why are you here?

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree