In today’s world of social media and speculation, it’s easy for facts to get lost. At Windlesham Parish Council, we publish all agendas, minutes, and financial information on our website. Instead of relying on third-party information, we encourage residents to refer to the published minutes, the official legal record of council business, for a clear and accurate understanding of council matters.

This fact check has been prepared in direct response to the claims made in a letter recently circulated to residents.

 "Windlesham can only have a Zebra Crossing in the village centre if Bagshot and Lightwater Councillors agree and allocate funds."

Incorrect

• 2019 Site Meeting: Windlesham Parish Council met with Surrey County Council (SCC) on site. SCC confirmed that, after reviewing technical requirements, a zebra crossing was not a suitable solution. Alternative options, including identified crossing points, were discussed.
• Traffic & Infrastructure Working Party: Following this, a working party was established with the remit of reviewing traffic issues. This group has since been overseen by the Windlesham Village Committee, working closely with SCC.
• Current Position: SCC has recently confirmed that Windlesham has been prioritised for a 20mph speed reduction scheme around the village.
• Funding: Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) monies generated within Windlesham (e.g., from Heathpark Wood development) can be committed to traffic projects at the discretion of the Windlesham Village Committee. There is no requirement for Lightwater or Bagshot to allocate funds.

"Lightwater and Bagshot Councillors voted to send a mailing opposing the plan to separate Windlesham into its own parish council and to spend huge sums on this publication."

Incorrect

• Council Resolution: The Council, voted as a democratic corporate body at the October 2025 full council meeting, and resolved to send a factual direct mail to all residents in Windlesham, Lightwater, and Bagshot. The purpose was to ensure residents were informed when responding to the Community Governance Review (CGR) and had access to details on any potential impact of structural change, particularly in light of the current local government reorganisation.
• Independent Review: Before going to print, the publication was reviewed by Surrey Heath Borough Council (SHBC) Democratic Services to confirm neutrality.
• Intent: The mailing was designed to provide information, not to advocate for or against the proposal, and clearly states the pros and cons of each scenario.
• Cost: The total cost for print and delivery was £1,630 and the leaflet is being distributed to approximately 8,000 households across the parish. 

 

"Lightwater and Bagshot can “grab” Community Infrastructure Levy funds for their own projects."

 It is misleading to suggest that Lightwater and Bagshot would “grab” the Windlesham Village Community Infrastructure funds.

• Legal Position: Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funds are paid to Windlesham Parish Council as the legal entity.
• Historical Position and Allocation: Records confirm that all CIL funds have been spent in the village where they were generated. This means funds raised from developments in Windlesham are used for projects in Windlesham.
• Control: Spending decisions are made at the village level, ensuring that local infrastructure improvements benefit the community that generated the funds.
• Transparency: Full details of CIL allocations can be viewed in the October Full Council meeting papers, which are available on our website.

 

 "What is happening to the proceeds from the sale of land at Hook Mill Lane?"

• Ownership: The land at Hook Mill Lane Depot is still owned by Windlesham Parish Council as a corporate body. The Council does not own a reservoir, and only Full Council can approve any disposal of the land.

• Motion Approved (Sept 2024): A motion was passed to amend the Lightwater Village Committee’s terms of reference so that:
o Responsibility for day to day business of Hook Mill Lane Depot (located in Lightwater) transfers from the Council’s top-level asset management to the Lightwater Village Committee.
o All associated costs/budgets and management responsibilities move to the Lightwater Committee (subject to Financial Regulations).
o If the asset is sold in future, proceeds will be allocated to the Lightwater Village Committee for the benefit of Lightwater residents, to address the imbalance in Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funds (as Lightwater has minimal ability to generate CIL income) and is unable to mitigate the impact on Lightwater of developments in surrounding villages.

• Voting Outcome: Change to Terms of Reference approved by recorded vote: 1 Windlesham, 6 Lightwater, 5 Bagshot councillors voted in favour.

• Transparency: Full details are in the September 2024 Council minutes, available on the Council’s website.

 

"Has the Parish Council allocated £40,000 to keep Windlesham in the same parish?"

Incorrect

No. It is incorrect to suggest that this budget was set aside to influence the outcome of the Community Governance Review (CGR) or to prevent Windlesham from forming its own parish.

•Budget Provision: In April 2024 the Council resolved to approve a contingency of up to £40,000 to cover professional advice and compliance costs associated with the statutory CGR process - not campaigning.

• November 2024 Update: The Council resolved that this sum would be transferred to a dedicated CGR Earmarked Reserve (EMR) to fund any associated costs, including staffing and administration, as additional workload and legal obligations are inevitable. Setting aside a dedicated reserve is considered good governance practice to ensure transparency, compliance, and proper risk management.

"Will the Snows Ride area be reunited with the rest of Windlesham?"

Yes - Regardless of whether Windlesham becomes its own parish council or remains combined, North and South Windlesham wards will be reunited.

• Decision: At the Surrey Heath Borough Council meeting on 22 October 2025, a motion was passed to reunite Windlesham North and South wards into a single ward starting from the May 2027 elections.
• Impact: This change is about electoral ward boundaries and representation, not parish council governance. It will happen regardless of the outcome of the Community Governance Review.


"Will the Council Tax Increase?"

• Future Budgets and Tax Rates: These will be set by the new councils themselves once they are established.
• Indicative Modelling: Budget modelling is indicative and based on known costs and baseline figures to guide residents.
• Duplication of Costs: Creating separate councils will involve some duplication of administration and services, so actual spending may exceed initial estimates.
• Transparency: For a detailed breakdown of the indicative modelling, visit our homepage: http://www.windleshampc.gov.uk

“The communication leaflet from Windlesham Parish Council about the Community Governance Review cost up to £11,000.”

Incorrect

The overall cost for producing and delivering a leaflet to individual households has cost in the region of £2,000, with the printing and delivery costing £1,630.
It should be noted that the Communications Committee resolved to approve a budget of £6,099 for direct mailshots unless a more cost-effective option was found. 

 

“Council tax was raised by 56% over two years.” 

True – but missing context.

• The parish precept did rise by 56%, but only after 8 years of minimal increases (14.5% from 2016–2024, despite inflation rising over 40%).
• Additional funds (£25,000) were allocated to Windlesham Cemetery, and matched fairly across all villages.
• In 2025–26, the rise was 8.27%, with Band D households paying £65.29 annually.
• By comparison, Band D precepts for neighbouring parish councils are: Bisley £70.30, West End £69.86 & Chobham £50.52
• All decisions were made publicly and are recorded in council minutes.


“Windlesham subsidises the other villages.”

 Incorrect

·         Windlesham contributes 26% of the total precept. Lightwater and Bagshot each contribute about 37%. 

·         While Windlesham Cemetery does generate more income than Bagshot and Lightwater, Windlesham Parish Council is a single burial authority, and as such, all three cemeteries are managed and maintained for the benefit of the entire parish.

·         Cemetery and burial services are discretionary functions. Under Section 93 of the Local Government Act 2003, the Council is permitted to charge fees for such services, but the law requires that the income from charges for each kind of service does not exceed the costs of provision. This ensures that cemetery income must be applied to the cost of delivering cemetery services, not used for unrelated expenditure or to generate profit.

 

“Windlesham Committee decisions are overturned.”
 Incorrect.

• No decisions have been overturned.
• A well-cited example: a proposal to restrict burials in Windlesham Cemetery to residents only was deferred, not overturned.
• It would have created a £39,000 shortfall in the budget.
• Full Council asked the Committee to review options, as part of responsible budgeting – not to overrule.
• This was a standard, financially responsible procedure, not an override of the Committee’s authority.
• In February the following year, it was unanimously resolved that each village committee would formulate a tailored cemetery improvement plan aimed at tackling capacity constraints and enhancing aesthetic appeal.


 “Assets are being transferred from Windlesham.”
Misleading.

• The Hook Mill Lane Depot is located in Lightwater. Giving the Lightwater Committee oversight does not change the fact that it remains a council asset.
• The Lightwater Committee is responsible for associated costs.
• Any future income (like from a sale) is proposed to benefit Lightwater residents, because Lightwater has limited ability to receive CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy) funds, unlike Bagshot and Windlesham.
• This aligns with NALC guidance on fair funding where development occurs.


 “Windlesham councillors are outvoted by the others.”
 Misleading.

• The Parish Council operates on a principle of collective decision-making.
• Each cross-village committee is made up of two members from each village, ensuring balanced representation across the parish.  It should be noted that Windlesham Village Committee chose not to fill all of their allocated seats on both the Communications and Planning Committees, which was a local decision by their members.
• Every councillor has one vote, regardless of the village they represent.
• No decision can be passed solely on the votes of one village – cross-parish support is always required for a motion to carry.

·         All committee and Full Council decisions are made in accordance with the Local Government Act 1972, during public meetings, with votes recorded transparently in the minutes.

 "The CIL money generated for the parish council by the new housing in Bagshot should be spent in Bagshot, not taken by conservative councillors for projects in other villages.  CIL could be used to pay for safety improvements on our roads, especially near schools."

Misleading

•  Each village retains its own CIL funds in a dedicated reserve for projects in that village.
• Bagshot Village Committee have committed up to £140,000 from CIL to help fund an approved traffic scheme in Bagshot Village. Over the last 2 years, the Bagshot Committee have worked alongside SCC Highways to help shape the traffic scheme.

 

 "The parish council misuse public funds."

Incorrect

• There is no misuse of public funds - all spending is approved in public meetings, the council is fully audited each year and funds allocated transparently across the three villages. 

 

"The parish council works for its own vested self-interests."

Incorrect

• The parish council works for residents, not vested interests - all decisions are made transparently in public.

 

"The current mega-parish means villages have to compete for resources and a huge amount of money is wasted on political campaigns which do not benefit residents, only the Conservative old guard."

Incorrect 

• Parish council money cannot and is not spent on politics and there is no political majority in the parish council. 
• Transparency and Financial information can be viewed on the council's website.

 

 For full transparency, all meeting minutes are available at www.windleshampc.gov.uk on the Council Meetings page.