Flintshire will raise council tax by 9.5% for 2025/26. They will also cut school budgets by 2.5%. A petition asks the council to rethink the tax increase. Over 1,500 people have signed it.

People reacted strongly on social media. Facebook users accused councillors of “robbing” them, and some called the council’s choices “atrocities.”

Council officials said they had no choice, as they need to balance a £23 million deficit, which is their legal duty. Council leader Dave Hughes addressed online comments. He gathered officials to fight “misinformation” and explained why they made the decision.

Hughes said some online messages were worrying. Documents looked official but used inflammatory language, which the council never uses because they want to be transparent about the situation.

Deputy leader Richard Jones and Gary Ferguson prepared a document. It explained the council’s finances and tax level. The council has 6,000 workers. Its annual budget was £368 million in 2024/25, and they provided over 600 services.

70% of funds come from the Welsh Government, while 30% comes from council tax. On December 11, the Welsh Government shared its draft settlement. The calculation assumed a 10.2% council tax increase, and the council’s deficit rose to £47.5m due to growing demand for social care.

The draft offered Flintshire £274.7m, only a 3.3% increase. Spending cuts didn’t close the gap, and Flintshire faced a £23m shortfall. Flintshire campaigned for a better settlement, wanting the average uplift of 4.45%. This meant £2.7m more for Flintshire, allowing a smaller tax increase.

However, the Welsh Government set a funding floor at 3.8%. Flintshire gained only £1.2m extra. Reserves were historically low after bad weather, with cleaning up an illegal waste site also costing money. Only £2.7m remained, meaning a setback could wipe out the reserves and they might not afford gritting or storm repairs.

If the council did not balance its budget, a Section 114 notice was possible. A Section 114 notice hands control to administrators who would act fast to fix the finances, potentially meaning deeper cuts and higher taxes. Even £1 over budget could have triggered the notice.

Ferguson stated they legally had to balance the budget by March 10 and propose measures to balance it. If members rejected it, he’d have to issue the notice because planned spending would exceed expected funding, and they hadn’t approved a tax increase.

Original cuts included bus subsidies and free school meals. These disproportionately impacted vulnerable people. Cllr Jones said they heard and considered concerns. Opponents proposed no alternative balanced budget.

Jones stated they took the concerns seriously and kept those costs in the budget. They recognize that people need those services. Criticism is fair, Jones added, however, no credible balanced budget arose and smaller reallocations were insignificant, given the huge budget.

Cllr Paul Johnson saw a north-south divide with councils proposing lower tax hikes mostly in the south. He noted that every north and mid-Wales council proposed over 7.5%, while the average in the south was 6.1%. Johnson addressed the idea that they don’t understand real people, arguing that they do, because these decisions affect them too.

Cllr Hughes knew people were upset about the tax. He said they were also upset because they didn’t want to raise council tax, reiterating the reasons and the fact that their settlement remained below average.

Flintshire is underfunded consistently. They now had no choice, Hughes explained. He stated that they listen, but online aggression worries him and welcomes civil debate about possible alternate solutions.

Flintshire will raise council tax by 9.5% for 2025/26. They will also cut school budgets by 2.5%. A petition asks the council to rethink the tax increase. Over 1,500 people have signed it.

People reacted strongly on social media. Facebook users accused councillors of “robbing” them, and some called the council’s choices “atrocities.”

Council officials said they had no choice, as they need to balance a £23 million deficit, which is their legal duty. Council leader Dave Hughes addressed online comments. He gathered officials to fight “misinformation” and explained why they made the decision.

Hughes said some online messages were worrying. Documents looked official but used inflammatory language, which the council never uses because they want to be transparent about the situation.

Deputy leader Richard Jones and Gary Ferguson prepared a document. It explained the council’s finances and tax level. The council has 6,000 workers. Its annual budget was £368 million in 2024/25, and they provided over 600 services.

70% of funds come from the Welsh Government, while 30% comes from council tax. On December 11, the Welsh Government shared its draft settlement. The calculation assumed a 10.2% council tax increase, and the council’s deficit rose to £47.5m due to growing demand for social care.

The draft offered Flintshire £274.7m, only a 3.3% increase. Spending cuts didn’t close the gap, and Flintshire faced a £23m shortfall. Flintshire campaigned for a better settlement, wanting the average uplift of 4.45%. This meant £2.7m more for Flintshire, allowing a smaller tax increase.

However, the Welsh Government set a funding floor at 3.8%. Flintshire gained only £1.2m extra. Reserves were historically low after bad weather, with cleaning up an illegal waste site also costing money. Only £2.7m remained, meaning a setback could wipe out the reserves and they might not afford gritting or storm repairs.

If the council did not balance its budget, a Section 114 notice was possible. A Section 114 notice hands control to administrators who would act fast to fix the finances, potentially meaning deeper cuts and higher taxes. Even £1 over budget could have triggered the notice.

Ferguson stated they legally had to balance the budget by March 10 and propose measures to balance it. If members rejected it, he’d have to issue the notice because planned spending would exceed expected funding, and they hadn’t approved a tax increase.

Original cuts included bus subsidies and free school meals. These disproportionately impacted vulnerable people. Cllr Jones said they heard and considered concerns. Opponents proposed no alternative balanced budget.

Jones stated they took the concerns seriously and kept those costs in the budget. They recognize that people need those services. Criticism is fair, Jones added, however, no credible balanced budget arose and smaller reallocations were insignificant, given the huge budget.

Cllr Paul Johnson saw a north-south divide with councils proposing lower tax hikes mostly in the south. He noted that every north and mid-Wales council proposed over 7.5%, while the average in the south was 6.1%. Johnson addressed the idea that they don’t understand real people, arguing that they do, because these decisions affect them too.

Cllr Hughes knew people were upset about the tax. He said they were also upset because they didn’t want to raise council tax, reiterating the reasons and the fact that their settlement remained below average.

Flintshire is underfunded consistently. They now had no choice, Hughes explained. He stated that they listen, but online aggression worries him and welcomes civil debate about possible alternate solutions.