Here comes your new Council Tax bill

BEXHILL families will face an increase of just under five per cent when Council Tax bills drop on to their doormats.

Typical Band D home owners will pay 1,370.64 a year after Rother this week finalised its portion of the tax, payable from April 1.

The figures compare favourably with Hastings where Band D home owners will pay 1,398.85.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Members chose on Monday to up their precept by 4.92 per cent - a figure of 137.15 a year on mid range properties.

Bexhill residents will pay extra towards special expenses such as Egerton Park, Broad Oak Park, Bexhill Down, recreation facilities, allotments and Bexhill Museum.

East Sussex County Council has set its portion at 1,004 - an increase of 4.7 per cent.

Sussex Fire and Rescue Authority will charge 70.26 for 2006/07, up 4.94 per cent, with the Sussex Police Authority precept set at 115.74, a rise of 4.98 per cent on last year.

Bexhill Banding, (2005 figures in brackets)

Band A - 913.76 (872.35)

Band B - 1066.06 (1,017.74)

Band C - 1,218.34 (1,163.13)

Band D - 1,370.64 (1,308.52)

Band E - 1,675.22 (1,599.30)

Band F - 1,979.82 (1,890.09)

Band G - 2,284.40 (2,180.87)

Band H - 2,741.28 (2,617.04)

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

At a town hall budget setting meeting of full council, Rother leader Graham Gubby, said: "We will remain by far the lowest Council Tax authority in East Sussex.

"We are a very lean authority, give good value for money and provide cost-effective services. By having the lowest number of staff per population we also have the lowest Council Tax. We are a very efficient organisation."

Cllr Gubby reaffirmed his commitment to investments which will increase efficiency and avoid dipping into Rother's reserves.

Liberal Democrat leader Sue Prochak suggested the council take 350,000 from the housing development capital programme and use the interest to pay for the growth of the Citizens Advice Bureau, motioned to be struck off the growth item list.

Cllr Robin Patten said: "On the surface it is a good idea but it is an incredibly dangerous precedent. It would leave the council open to whimsical chance ..."

The proposal was rejected.