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.

 Claim 1: “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.


 Claim 2: “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.

 

Claim 3: “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.


 Claim 4: “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.


 Claim 5: “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.

Claim 6: "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.

 

Claim 7: "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. 

 

Claim 8: "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.

 

Claim 9: "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.