Dunblane Community Council
Calum Thomson
Secretary
cc@dunblane.info
Anna Jarchow-MacDonald
Chair
cc@dunblane.info
Minutes of the Extraordinary meeting of the Dunblane Community Council
held on Wednesday, 19 February, 2025, at 7 p.m. in the Library, Dunblane.
This is a “blended” meeting, with some attendees joining by Zoom. The
purpose of this public meeting is to give residents the opportunity to
discuss Stirling Council’s Budget and the proposed cuts and savings with
the elected members.
Present: Anna Jarchow-MacDonald (Chair), Jonathan Failes (Vice-Chair), Alan
Booth, Karen Jenkins, Rachel Nelson, Caroline McArthur.
In attendance: Councillors Alasdair Tollemache, David Wilson, Robin
Kleinman and Thomas Heald, Mairi Santolini (Parent Council, Dunblane High
School), Liz-Anne Richards, Margaret Bragg (Minutes Secretary). In addition,
several residents attended in person or by Zoom.
Apologies
Apologies have been received from Annelise Bakri and Rachael Muir.
Welcome and introduction
The Chair, Anna Jarchow-MacDonald, introduced herself and welcomed
everyone to this Extraordinary Community Council Meeting. She thanked them
for attending either in person or via Zoom and outlined the role of the
community council as a communication bridge between Dunblane residents
and Stirling Council. The following discussions were in response to questions
submitted (by Mentimeter if online) for the elected members to answer.
She noted that all Councils are struggling for money and it is important to
understand the process around funding and the basis on which proposals are
made. It is also important that people recognise that most of the money comes
from the Scottish Government and the Council is constrained in how to spend
- The agenda for the Council budget meeting will be published on 21
February, with the Council meeting on 27 February to pass its budget.
Page 2 of 5
The Big Conversation survey
Slides produced by Stirling Council, based on the two phases of The Big
Conversation it has held, were shown. This information can also be found on
the Council website. Approximately 3% of the population of the area
participated in the survey, with most responses (1% of the population)
received from Dunblane, Bridge of Allan and Cambusbarron. It was recognised
that people responded in the survey based on their own personal situation
and do not always understand the consequences of the cuts, if they are not
going to be impacted directly. It is, therefore, difficult to analyse the results
with any confidence in reflecting the opinions of the residents of the area.
Rachel Nelson expressed disappointment in the low level of participation in
the survey compared to the previous year, and thought it had not been
publicised well by the Council. Residents are not well informed of what the
Council does, the sources of its funds (over 70% from the Scottish
Government, 19% from council tax), and the role of elected members and the
different committees.
Budget shortfall
Stirling Council budget stands at £320m and a shortfall of over £12m is
anticipated for 2025-26, unless savings are made. The Council has been able
to find £8m to plug the gap by restructuring and efficiencies but has still to
find another £4m, hence the proposed cuts in services and increases in certain
charges.
The elected members make decisions based on information drawn up by
Council officers. They have to trust that a thorough analysis has been made,
including of contingencies for any unexpected crisis. Reductions in service can
only be proposed for non-statutory services. Every year Council officers
report on their progress in meeting their projected savings.
Impact Assessments
The lack of Impact Assessments was criticised and the importance of
recognising that a cut in service to save money at present could lead to greater
costs in the future. For example, staff redundancies would not show
immediate savings because of associated costs; savings would not be apparent
until the following financial year. However, Councillor Wilson doubted this
would result in savings if agencies or consultants then had to be hired.
Councillor Tollemache pointed out that services might still be delivered but
over a longer period and not to the same standard.
The Chair suggested that that any cut should be reviewed later to assess its
impact but Councillor Tollemache felt that any cut would be unlikely to be
reinstated.
Alan Booth criticised the lack of proper assessments of the different proposals
and argued that the public should be given background data early on in the
process, thus giving them an opportunity to comment. The Chair felt that an
Page 3 of 5
opportunity has been missed to engage with residents whose experience and
expertise in commenting on the proposals would be useful to the Council. The
more different opinions that are heard, the better the outcome.
Council tax
It was agreed that an opportunity to discuss the level of council tax was
missed in the Big Conversation survey: gauging opinion on residents’
willingness to pay more council tax in return for retaining some services.
Councillor Tollemache commented that, in view of the increase in council tax,
people want to know if the Council is using their money efficiently. Because
council tax has been frozen or capped by the Scottish Government over the
last few years, any rise will be substantial, and will be difficult for many
people, especially for those who are struggling with the cost of living. He
complained that local democracy and accountability have been compromised
by the constraints of central government. Councillor Kleinman agreed that it
would have been better to have small increases every year instead of a big
jump now. Although council tax accounts for only 19% of income, increasing
it would help to prevent some services being lost or reduced. All Councils in
Scotland are looking at raising council tax.
Caroline McArthur suggested that a full public audit of Council spending is
necessary and this information should be publicised. People are seeing that
they are paying more, but getting less.
Health
Councillor Wilson highlighted the work of the Integrated Joint Board (IJB)
comprising NHS Forth Valley and Stirling and Clackmannanshire Councils,
which delivers adult care. This, paid for through council tax, is facing a budget
gap, but many people are totally unaware of this. The discussion over the
Council budget should be widened to cover this.
Mairi Santolini highlighted the proposal to remove school counselling funding
which she said is an essential service to protect the mental health of young
people. Councillor Heald agreed with her but pointed out that the Council does
not have a statutory duty to provide this. In response, she suggested that
Parent Councils get together to lobby the Government to make this a statutory
duty.
Libraries
Councillor Heald said the discussion over the reduction in libraries’ opening
hours should be widened to include information on how well libraries are
used. He felt libraries could be utilised better for school children. Mairi
Santolini reported that there had been a big push for each pupil in Dunblane
to get a library card.
Page 4 of 5
The Chair commented that Dunblane library is well used by different groups
and by all ages. Councillor Kleinman pointed out that it will be difficult to
reduce costs at the same time as delivering the same level of service. It would
be inequitable for Dunblane library to be supported at the expense of other
libraries; there should be universal provision.
Transport
Mairi Santolini highlighted that the proposal to review school transport to
match statutory guidance would mean that pupils would have to walk from
Kinbuck and Ashfield into Dunblane. There is no designated safe walking
route and younger pupils and disabled children would find this difficult. She
reported that the Parent Council is part of the discussion about the transport
needs of the community.
With reference to the 20mph limit being extended throughout Dunblane, it
was noted that this is a Scottish Government initiative with funding coming
directly from Holyrood. However, it was agreed that too many people do not
observe the limit and it is hoped that, over time, behaviour will change. The
Chair suggested that the costs associated with a speed camera be shared with
other community councils but recognised that this is a difficult process
involving the Police. However, Alan Booth asked that the elected members
press the Police to enforce the limit, especially when it is introduced on the
Perth Road.
Engagement
Jonathan Failes asked how to engage and connect better with the community
to ensure they are involved. He said that people should be made aware of the
thought processes behind the vote, and asked who is responsible for
community consultation. After the budget vote by the Council, how is this fed
back to the community, especially to those who participated in the survey.
After the proposals are published on 21 February, the various political
groupings within the Council discuss them and submit their amendments.
Once the budget is passed, it cannot normally be revisited for six months. The
Councillors discussed the compromises they have to make in order to get the
budget passed; individual Councillors can feel constrained to vote for
proposals they do not agree with. Councillor Tollemache complained that
Councillor officers put forward proposals that are known to be politically
unacceptable. All want a functioning Council but all understand that savings
and reductions are necessary.
The community council is critical of the lack of background information to
the various proposals, how they come to be part of the Big Conversation
survey, and the lack of feedback afterwards. In addition, the lack of publicity
from the Council on the survey and the long-term consequences of the
proposals was criticised.
The Chair, in agreeing that more information on the allocation of funds and
any efficiencies should be publicised, stressed the importance of taking
Page 5 of 5
comments from this meeting back to the Council. She asked for information
on how the Council found £8m of savings which were not up for discussion.
She is attending a meeting of the Informed Communities group of Chairs of
community councils the following day when these issues will be discussed.
The meeting ended at 9.10 p.m.