Just posted on from WWP: http://forums.whyweprotest.net/threads/ ... st-1818533
Dox from the council meeting on 11th July:http://www.hastings.gov.uk/meetings/mee ... Relief.htm
NON-DOMESTIC RATE RELIEF: Charities, Community Amateur Sports Clubs (CASCs) and Other Organisations
1. To grant discretionary relief, in addition to the 80% mandatory relief, for charities in respect of the period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012 for 91 of the 93 cases as listed in Appendix A.
The application from Narconon London be refused on the grounds that no evidence has been supplied on the extent to which services are supplied to the local community.
8. An application has been received from Narconon London (listed as number 83 in Appendix A). It is recommended that this application be refused on the grounds that no information has been provided which establishes the extent to which services are provided to the local community.
27. Narconon London advises in its application form that it does employ local people and that its services are available to local residents but the requested information detailing the extent to which the charity provides a local service has not been supplied. As a registered Charity the organisation qualifies for 80% mandatory rate relief. The refusal is not expected to have a significant impact.
Rateable value of the last known property of Narconon Hastings/St.Leonards at Albany Road, St.Lenoards, is around £46,000 and by the business rates calculator it comes out at just over £20,000 for the annual business rates bill.
Councils can grant 80% mandatory and up to 20% discretionary relief.
From the language of the dox it sounds like they got the 80% "by the book" mandatory relief by virtue of Narconon currently being a registered charity in the UK but the council used its discretion and rejected the application for the remaining 20% (which represents around £4,000 per annum that the cult will definately lose out on).
That might be peanuts to David Miscavige but we now have this citable newsmedia gem: "..... the authority could find no evidence that its work helped the local community"
. This is a useful piece of information to have if fighting against local planning/zoning applications for Narconon facilities as one more reason why they should not be there.
Btw, previously it had been reported that Narconon's tenancy on property in St.Leonards was due end and the building sold by the landlord (see: viewtopic.php?t=32823
So I don't know what happened with that, e.g. the tenancy has been extended, or whether we are talking about some other/addtional property in the area (but I doubt that considering the expense of installing the saunas etc).
[Local Marcab agents will probably confirm the situation later].
Also, one reason for not granting discretionary relief on the basis that they have no benefit to the local community could be due to the fact that the property at St.Leonards is not, in reality, offering residential rehab because, according to this interesting article about Narconon Hastings/St.Lenoards
previously posted on OCMB Oct 2010: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=32916
there is some discrepancy over that residency status. Official reports say one thing and the cult's website says another.