The Significance of the Oak Project Motion Beyond Cheadle's Royal Oak Building
The Oak Project at Cheadle Town Council. Monday 2nd November 2026
Listen to the full discussion here:
Councillor Vicky Wheeldon retracted her request for Cheadle Town Council to evaluate the possibility of underwriting the £300,000 loan she had earlier asked them to consider, which was intended to help the Oak Project group acquire the Royal Oak building.
She'd told the meeting that there had been over £1,000 in donations received in the last month, which caused councillors to further speculate on the desire among townsfolk for the project.
This followed the update from the clerk informing the meeting that SMDC have said they would not be able to support a loan from the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB), a lending facility operated by the UK Debt Management Office (DMO) on behalf of HM Treasury, who provide low-cost, long-term loans to local authorities and other specified public bodies across the UK, because the Royal Oak Building would be the collateral for the loan and the PWLB loans against local authority revenues.
To simplify, SMDC felt that taking on that loan would put their revenue at risk. Instead, they suggested that the Town Council could underwrite the loan because the Town Council could increase the council tax should the Oak Project fail to meet its obligation. SMDC doesn't want to take the risk but has no issue suggesting that the Town Council take the burden of responsibility, and if it fails, the public will pay through our council tax. This is not what council tax is for!
The Clerk, Rachel Parker, had also advised that to consider the request, the council would need to conduct a public consultation, which would cost around £2,500 - £5,000. Cllr Pete Jackson pointed out this would take in excess of 6 months to complete, exceeding the 2/3 months the Oak Project has left to find the money before the building is sold.
The discussion (standing orders were removed by Mayor Routeledge), led by Cllrs Ellis & Thomas, had firmly asked for more information to show the project's viability, believing the town to be at significant risk without firm plans from the group. Cllr Wheeldon said they did not have any further information they could share and going into the finer details would put them at commercial risk, particularly as if this project did not go ahead, the group would look for another building. Cllrs pointed out that there is a mechanism for this "Confidential Items".
The clerk had also informed the meeting that she had received advice that if the council needed to pay the loan, then this would put about 17 percent on the precept, which would mean every household in the town would see an increase of 17 percent on their monthly council tax. For one resident living alone in a low band property, this would cost an estimated £23 per month on current figures.
Cllr Thomas said that without the figures to support sanctioning the loan and the feasibility of the project, he could not agree to anything further, citing the drastic measures they were asking the town to undertake.Cllr Ellis accused the group of navel-gazing and said that a 17 percent increase in council tax would be an unprecedented step by the council. Both councillors Thomas & Ellis made it clear that they were not rejecting the proposal which only asked the council to consider the possibility of underwriting the loan, not actually taking the decision to do it, but simply asking for more information. Cllr Jackson further pointed out that a motion had not been made by Cllr Wheeldon to ask the council to take on the loan and until they were asked he felt there was nothing to be discussed.
Cllr Wheeldon does have the option to bring this back to council at any time and our concern is that this process shows that at the moment anyone can now bring the most ludicrous and dangerous ideas to this council and get a full hearing.
This is a discussion that should never have reached the full council. It should have been initially evaluated by the finance committee, headed by Wheeldon, who did not bring it up there. The Leisure and Operations Committee, led by Cllr Upton, another Oak Project Trustee, should have assessed the project's viability from the town's perspective. The Planning Committee should have examined whether the project's plans were feasible, and the BTEC - Business, Tourism, and Environmental Committee should have analysed the business plan. Cllrs Wheeldon, Upton, and Plant should have declared their full and proper interests, which has not yet occurred. The clerk had the option not to present this to the full council, a right previously exercised by the former clerk, Dave Mullington, and the Mayor/Deputy Mayor could have directed this motion to the appropriate committees.
While the public might not be aware that these discussions were occurring since their details aren't currently shared anywhere (though they can be requested, and anyone can attend the meetings), this situation wouldn't have placed the council in such a difficult position. It also wouldn't have resulted in additional work for the clerk, who prepared a 53-page report based on her own research, nor would it have given the Oak Project false hope, enabling them to explore other options sooner.
This council appears to show considerable dysfunction, and disregard of their own processes. Without significant improvement, is it likely to do well under the impending new local authority?
The Significance of the Oak Project Motion Beyond Cheadle's Royal Oak Building
