More than £130,000 set aside for Community Wardens in Chichester
It covers half of the costs over the next three years
Chichester District Council has agreed to use £133,000 to cover half of the cost of the district’s Community Warden service for the next three years.
The money was approved during a meeting of the full council on Tuesday (September 27) and will be used from April 1 2023.
The Community Wardens have been out and about in the district since 2005, dealing with more than 55,000 incidents of mainly low-level crime and anti-social behaviour.
Laying out reasons why the service should continue, Roy Briscoe, cabinet member for community services & culture, said: “If funding for the Community Warden service is not secured, the areas in which they currently operate will be further exposed to crime and anti-social behaviour.
“Vulnerable individuals may not be identified and opportunities to refer them for support missed. Demand on other council services could increase resulting in additional financial costs to ourselves.”
Last November a review was launched, looking into that funding in an effort to come up with a fairer, more evenly split, model.
While the district council covers half of the costs, partners such as the town and parish councils, cover the rest.
The meeting was told that the partners had been ‘very positive’ about the review and felt the new funding model was ‘far more fair and transparent’.
The continuation of the scheme for another three years received full support from councillors – but one area which did not go down well with everyone was the decision to cut the number of wardens from eight to seven.
During the review, one of the Tangmere and Oving wardens resigned and the decision was made not to replace them.
It was a decision previously described by Tony Dignum (Con, Chichester North) as ‘opportunistic and short-sighted’.
Simon Oakley (Con, North Mundham & Tangmere) felt the service needed to be given higher priority when it came to funding.
He said: “I consider that this sort of activity, directly supporting communities in dealing with antisocial behaviour and other social issues, should have a far higher priority than funding other activities such as cultural activities, which are highly discretionary and of limited benefit to our overall communities.
“I think we are prioritising the wrong things here.”