Charity groups and other organisations which faced losing free use of Oxford Town Hall have been given a reprieve.
Earlier this month, it emerged that the city council was planning to recoup some of the £500,000 a year it costs to run the building by introducing charges.
Some groups who used the town hall free of charge were told they would have to pay, while 17 organisations were told they would be exempt.
Representatives from the City of Oxford Charities and the Oxford Pedestrians' Association told councillors that they did not run "money-generating organisations".
Yesterday, at the city council strategy and resources committee, councillors agreed to put the controversial proposals on hold.
The suggestion has now been referred to the civic and property sub-committee for further consideration.
Labour group leader Alex Hollingsworth suggested that meetings on weekdays should still be free.
But Green councillor Jacob Sanders said the whole scheme should now be scrapped.
He added: "It was wrong to try to charge groups who could not afford to pay the charges.
"I would question whether large commercial organisations would want to use the town hall.
"It has been underestimated how important the town hall is to the local community.
"I think this proposal should be scrapped altogether and we should maintain the status quo."
Liberal Democrat and Green councillors agreed 1.7m worth of cuts, including 30 job losses, mainly in the leisure services department.
They have already agreed £2m worth of cuts and are planning a 9.5 per cent increase in council tax, up on last year's four per cent increase.
They also agreed to put up parking charges at park and ride car parks from 50p to £1, although county council officers, who are not in favour of the move, will have to be consulted.
Cllr Corinna Redman told the committee that council leaders had been expecting to set a budget which would leave the authority with 2m in balances.
But a 'missing' million £500,000 predicted income from the City Works budget which had not been realised, and a £430,000 overspend left them with only £1m in the bank.
Council officers have also been asked to look at the city's property portfolio as a possible means of raising income.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article