MEDIA coverage in recent weeks has highlighted the issue of domestic rates in the Fermanagh and Omagh District, and how they are set to change.

That news sparked some public anger and criticism about the decision, including an online petition calling for a review into the decision, with businesses and locals unhappy about the rates changes.

The Council's Chief Executive, Alison McCullagh (AMcC), discussed the controversial topic with The Impartial Reporter (TIR).

TIR: How does the council react to the criticism from residents of the district to the rising of the rates?

AMcC: Councillors are always very sensitive to the concerns of residents across the district, and this is certainly the case in relation to the rates-setting process.

As was acknowledged at the Special Council Meeting, this has been a particularly challenging year, but members were keen to ensure that the Council would continue to deliver its full range of services in the 2021/22 financial year.

The rate of 1.37% ensures that we can continue to deliver on our services for the residents of the district.

The average rates bill for residents of our district will increase by a total of £5.65 for the year; the maximum rates increase – which would affect those residents whose homes are worth £400,000 or more – will have an increase of £20.10 for the year.

Does the Council accept that many people are struggling this year with being furloughed, unemployment, home-schooling, Covid-19 issues etc, and that the rates hike was the latest hit for them?

The Council recognises the unique challenges which residents across the district have faced this year.

In seeking to strike an affordable rate, members also wished to ensure that the district did not face a reduction in Council services, which could have further adversely impacted on those residents most in need.

There was a proposal for a zero rates increase for this year due to Covid-19. Why did the Council decide to not allow it to go to a vote? Was that block not an undemocratic move?

A proposal was made for a zero rates increase, which would [as a second part of the proposal] have zero impact on Council services, staffing numbers, terms and conditions, and capital projects.

]However] the second part of the proposal contradicted the first, in that a zero rates increase could not be achieved without an impact on services, staffing, etc.

As the proposal was not technically competent, the Chair ruled it out of order.

What services would have been at risk if there was a zero per cent rates position adopted?

Members emphasised at all stages in the Estimates process that they did not wish there to be any reduction in Council services, and a zero per cent rates position would have necessitated overall budget savings in the region of £1.5 million to be achieved.

Initial scoping work identified that those services which would have been most adversely affected, in such a scenario, would have been Leisure Services, Waste and Recycling, Street Cleansing and Grounds Maintenance.

Members made it clear that such a scenario was not acceptable, and further consideration of such changes was not pursued.

What do you say to people who criticise the high wage bill of Fermanagh and Omagh District Council, especially as Review of Public Administration (RPA) was meant to streamline costs and efficiency?

The key principle of RPA was to devolve as much decision-making as possible to a local level, and it was anticipated that this could also achieve greater efficiencies.

The original business case identified that cost savings could be achieved, but envisaged this would take in excess of 20 years.

Our wage bill is high, but is broadly comparable with other councils. The Council employs its staff directly and avoids the use of agencies; members also recognised that we had made progress in the past 12 months, with our wage bill accounting for 72 per cent rather than 76 per cent of net budgets.

Can you understand that, given the fact that we have our council lending other councils vast sums, why people are angry given this year's rates rises?

The rate of 1.37 per cent will equate in an annual increase of £3.77 on a lower-valued property, up to £20.10 for those whose homes are worth £400,000 or more.

The practice of councils lending to each other is part of our wider Treasury Management arrangements, and is very temporary in nature.

The loan arrangements did not restrict the Council in its decisions regarding the setting of the rates.

There has been a call for an alternative thinking on rates, given the changing nature of the retail sector, in particular, to shift to online business. Is this something the Council is looking at?"

The issue of rates policy is a responsibility of central government, and specifically, the Department of Finance.

Councils have no local flexibility to introduce 'alternative thinking' on rates, but should the Department consider changes to the current legislation, the Council would wish to engage in such consultations positively.

Just prior to the Special Council Meeting, the Department of Finance introduced the legislation to enable Councils to set different rates for domestic and non-domestic properties.

This is something the Council will wish to consider in the context of future rates setting.

Is the collection of rates, domestic and non-domestic, sustainable in the long run in its current format?

As said before, this is a matter for the Department of Finance.

My personal opinion is that the pervasive and long-lasting implications of Covid-19 are likely to have an impact on our towns and villages for the foreseeable future.

I think it would be preferable for councils to have much greater flexibility in the rates-setting process, which would allow us to take into account local circumstance and particular challenges in any given year.

There have been calls for a review of the rates-setting decision [to increase them]. Is that likely to happen?

I am aware of some social media commentary on this issue. There are specific mechanisms available within the Council's decision-making [mechanisms] to facilitate reviews of decisions, but as at this time [March 2], no formal process has been initiated.