Agenda and minutes
PDF 297 KBContact: Democratic Services
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Apologies Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Richard Morgan, Tony Berry, Richard Keeling, Claire Bloomer and Mark Annett. |
|
|
Declarations of Interest To receive any declarations of interest from Members and Officers, relating to items to be considered at the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|
|
To confirm the minutes of the meeting of Council held on 14 July 2021. Additional documents:
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 14 July 2021 were agreed as a true record subject to the following amendments:
In relation to the recorded votes at page three of the minutes under the Affordable Housing Schemes item, Members voting ‘for’ should read 28.
In relation to the recorded votes at page four of the minutes under the Recommendations from Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet - Tetbury and Fairford Leisure Provision Task and Finish Group item, Members voting ‘for’ should read 17 and ‘abstentions’ 11 with six Members being absent.
At page six of the minutes, under the resolution of item 24, ‘the updated Planning Protocol as outlined at Appendix 6, is adopted;’ should instead read ‘the updated Planning Protocol as outlined at Appendix 6, is adopted as of 1 September 2021;’
Council noted the reasons behind the late circulation of the July draft minutes which was partly due to staff shortages within Democratic Services. Officers would endeavour to get draft minutes circulated in a shorter time frame going forwards.
Officers would endeavour to ensure that Member’s names were spelled correctly.
RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 14 July 2021 were agreed as a true record subject to the above amendments being made.
Record of Voting – for: 26, against: 0, abstentions: 0, absent: 8. |
|
|
Announcements from the Chair, Leader or Chief Executive (if any) Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair of the Council, Councillor Dilys Neill welcomed Members and Officers back to the Council Chamber as the return to in-person meetings continued.
Members of the public and press who were watching the webcast of the meeting were also welcomed.
The Chair of the Council and the Mayor of Cirencester Town Council, Councillor Claire Bloomer had recently attended the Relay for Life. Members and Officers had been saddened by the death of Tallis Shakespeare (Tree Officer, Cotswold District Council) who had recently passed away following a battle with cancer. The Chair proposed that a team of Members and Officers be put together to compete in the 2022 Relay for Life in memory of Tallis Shakespeare.
Following the completion of the July Council meeting, the Chair had worked with Councillors Nikki Ind and Julia Judd to conduct a working group to look at the climate change awards system. In relation to this, Council noted that Cabinet were best placed to discuss this matter and take a decision on it. In relation to the Chair’s award for community service, Council noted that a nomination was sought by the Conservative Group for a Member to take part in the work in this area as part of the working group.
Council noted the importance of ensuring that Member conduct within meetings was appropriate at all times.
Public questions were welcome, but should always be relevant to Council business and should not be used to facilitate party political debate.
The Constitution Working Group would continue to look at Member Questions and how these could be appropriately facilitated within Council meetings.
The Chair outlined the Member debating and motions procedures.
Council noted that Councillor Roly Hughes would be selling poppies outside Tesco Metro from 30 October.
The Leader of the Council, Councillor Joe Harris addressed the Committee, welcoming back Members and Officers to the Council Chamber.
Members noted the importance of webcasting meetings to make Council decisions more accessible to members of the public.
The Leader of the Council paid tribute to Tallis Shakespeare.
In relation to the resettlement of refugees from Afghanistan, the Council noted that it was crucial to support these individuals – a Gloucestershire-wide approach was being utilised in this regard which had been working well. The Council was working with partners to offer accommodation to refugees within the District.
In relation to the recent Local Government Ombudsman decision related to the Council, Members noted that the Council would always be open and honest when things had not gone to plan. The Leader made a public apology to the resident affected and offered assurance that the Council’s revenues and benefits team had worked hard to make improvements to ensure that this would not occur again. A report had already been considered by Cabinet in this regard at their September meeting.
Members noted that in recent years, the Council had been identified as one of the District authorities receiving the least amount of complaints.
The first Parish Council Forum meeting would be held ... view the full minutes text for item 31. |
|
|
Public Questions To deal with questions from the public within the open forum question and answer session of fifteen minutes in total. Questions from each member of the public should be no longer than two minutes each and relate to issues under the Council’s or Committee’s remit. Any member of the public wishing to ask a public question is requested to contact Democratic Services by no later than 5.00pm the working day before the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: A record of public questions and answers are available in the schedule attached to these minutes. Two questions were asked by Mr Gibson and were directed to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Joe Harris.
Due to technical difficulties, Mr Gibson, who had joined the meeting virtually was unable to address Council.
The Leader of the Council had received the questions in advance of the meeting and provided responses to both. |
|
|
Member Questions The following questions have been submitted:
Question from Councillor Julia Judd to Councillor Andrew Doherty, Cabinet Member for the Environment, Waste and Recycling:
This Council notes that an unexpected consequence of Covid-19 has been an escalation in dog ownership. According to the Pet Food Manufacturers Association over 12million of us now own a dog and their Covid-19 Pet Survey confirms a staggering rise in pet acquisition with dogs being the most popular at 57%.
Some of the towns and larger Cotswold villages popular with visitors have suffered from an over-supply of dog waste causing the bins to fill up quickly. Images of dog waste bags lying on the ground around overflowing bins have appeared on social media , especially in Tetbury.
Could resources be made available to address this situation and ensure that sufficient bins are made available and regularly emptied before they overfill where there have been issues?
Questions from Councillor David Cunningham to Councillor Andrew Doherty, Cabinet Member for the Environment, Waste and Recycling:
1) In light of the Council’s Flood Warden Initiative and the new as yet unseen (I believe) Flood Plan, can the Cabinet Member confirm how much of the impending budget will be allocated for those communities hardest hit by last year’s floods.
2) Will villages be expected to ‘bid’ for assistance or will the Council work with the Environment Agency and other entities to ascertain which communities have the greatest need and have already identified to alleviate solutions to alleviate their flooding issues.
Given this Councils commitment to fighting the climate emergency , will the Cabinet Member acknowledge that this must include taking tangible action against the current effects of climate change and addressing the immediate needs of residents.
Question from Councillor Richard Norris to Councillor Mike Evemy, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance:
1) Visitors to Cirencester’s car parks are experiencing a number of difficulties in paying by APP since the removal of cash payments. Is Councillor Evemy aware of these problems , if so, could he please explain and advise what action is being taken to resolve all difficulties.
2) With reference to the decision taken by Full Council on the 17 March 2021 to enter into an agreement with SLM:
a) That Council approves a profit sharing mechanism to recover the support offered to SLM as set out at recommendations a) and b).
b) The Council will be entitled to take a 75% share of profits in excess of the tendered financial submission until the funding is recovered.
c) That authority to sign an agreement with SLM confirming the terms upon which this financial package is based be delegated to the Deputy Chief Executive in consultation with the Deputy Leader of the Council or in his absence with the Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing.
Has an agreement in fact been entered into and could this agreement be provided along with confirmation that the terms and conditions are being observed by both parties.
Also provided in Agenda Item ... view the full agenda text for item 33. Additional documents: Minutes: A record of Member questions and answers are available in the schedule attached to these minutes.
Questions were asked by:
Councillor Julia Judd to Councillor Andrew Doherty, Cabinet Member for the Environment, Waste and Recycling.
Councillor David Cunningham to Councillor Andrew Doherty, Cabinet Member for the Environment, Waste and Recycling.
Councillor Richard Norris to Councillor Mike Evemy, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance.
|
|
|
Purpose To request funding for essential repairs at the Council property; Cirencester Leisure Centre
Recommendations That Council, as recommended by Cabinet: a) approves the funding request of £110,000 for maintenance within the Cirencester Leisure Centre Pool Hall. b) that delegated authority is granted to the Deputy Chief Executive to update the Capital Programme, the Capital Strategy and the Treasury Management Strategy to include the requested funding. c) that, if the funding is approved, delegated authority is granted to the Deputy Chief Executive in consultation with the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and the Group Manager for Commissioning to agree the final funding on receipt of the tenders and to award the contracts for the necessary works set out in the report.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Mike Evemy introduced the report and informed Council that Cirencester Leisure Centre was a key community facility.
Council noted that urgent maintenance was required in order that the facility could remain operational. Members noted the summary of required work which was outlined in the report.
Members noted that the pool would need to be closed during the completion of these works.
Officers would work with the contractor to ensure that any pool closures were kept to a minimum.
Council noted that the first instances of paint flaking had been observed in June 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic. The continual flaking of paint had caused structural issues which now required attention. These works could not have been completed during the closing of leisure centres during the pandemic due to the lack of available contractors and staff due to the pandemic. Whilst not ideal to close the leisure centre which would result in a loss of revenue, the works were essential to ensure the longevity of the facility.
The Committee noted that as part of the contract between SLM and the Council, SLM retained some responsibility for the maintenance of the building, although the responsibility for the structure remained with the Council which was why the approval of Council was being sought to commission the required structural works.
The Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance proposed that Council agreed the recommendations as set out in the report. This was seconded by Councillor Jenny Forde.
RESOLVED that Council, as recommended by Cabinet:
a) approved the funding request of £110,000 for maintenance within the Cirencester Leisure Centre Pool Hall.
b) that delegated authority was granted to the Deputy Chief Executive to update the Capital Programme, the Capital Strategy and the Treasury Management Strategy to include the requested funding.
c) that, if the funding is approved, delegated authority was granted to the Deputy Chief Executive in consultation with the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and the Group Manager for Commissioning to agree the final funding on receipt of the tenders and to award the contracts for the necessary works set out in the report
Record of Voting – for: 26, against: 0, abstentions: 0, absent: 8.
|
|
|
Notice of Motions In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12, the following Motions have been received:-
a) Motion – Scrap the Proposals in the Planning White Paper
Proposed by Councillor Rachel Coxcoon, Seconded by Councillor Joe Harris:
Council notes: The significant concerns expressed through the ballot box in Chesham & Amersham over the Conservative Government’s proposed Planning Reforms, including:
· Loss of democratic accountability within the planning system, under a proposed zoning system that would grant presumed consent to development in two of the three zones.
· No commitment to using the planning system to tackle climate change, either through genuinely sustainable placemaking, or through the imposition of a building standards system that will deliver zero-carbon homes.
· The expansion of Permitted Development Rights under this Government, which have already led to the development of ‘modern day slums’.
· Widespread concerns and condemnation of the Planning White Paper proposals across Local Government, The Planning and Architecture Sector, and organisations concerned with protecting green spaces and heritage.
Council is concerned that:
Government proposals to deregulate planning will remove the rights of residents to influence or object to inappropriate development where they live.
The Government's proposals pass the costly burden of design codes from developers to local government, and result in codes that will hold no statutory weight.
The proposals in the White Paper, coupled with the weakness of the proposed Future Homes Standard and Design Codes and the ease with which Permitted Development Rights can now be used, means that the planning system is in danger of becoming an active enabler of the climate crisis, rather than part of the solution.
And finally,
That the proposals in the White Paper, designed principally to speed up the delivery of much needed housing, are doomed to fail on this crucial point, since the slow delivery of housing is demonstrably not a result of delays within the planning decision-making system. Rather, it is the result of land-banking and market manipulation by the development industry. Almost a million homes already have planning permission but have not been built out. Zoning, and thus the allocation of more land for housing, will secure land value increases for a small number of major development companies, but will not alter the speed at which housing comes to the market.
Council believes that:
Residents have the right to a say over development that will change the area they live in.
Local councils, in consultation with their businesses and residents are best placed to understand the issues in their area and respond with a spatial strategy tailored to that area.
The planning system is not fit for purpose if climate change is not the pre-eminent test in decision-making, and local planning authorities are not required to manage emissions through the planning system.
International evidence shows that zoning systems, far from producing the simplified system that advocates suggest, can often result in less transparent, less accountable decision-making than a discretionary, plan-led system. The development industry, not the planning system, is the main cause of slow housing delivery.
Council calls for ... view the full agenda text for item 35. Additional documents: Minutes: Members had been given notice of a number of Motions, detailed on the agenda.
a) Motion – Scrap the Proposals in the Planning White Paper
Proposed by Councillor Rachel Coxcoon, Seconded by Councillor Joe Harris.
Council noted that the debate around the motion needed to take place before any further proposals were made.
Councillor Rachel Coxcoon provided further context around the motion.
The Leader of the Council, Councillor Joe Harris reserved his right to speak.
Councillor Clive Webster expressed his support for the motion.
Councillor Patrick Coleman expressed his concerns around how the Government would manage the process of amending the planning regulations.
Councillor Stephen Andrews proposed that the motion moved to a vote.
Councillor Joe Harris expressed a view that the proposed planning amendments would not benefit local communities.
Councillor Rachel Coxcoon provided a summary of the motion.
RESOLVED that the motion was carried.
Record of Voting – for: 16, against: 0, abstentions: 10, absent: 8.
b) Motion - Community Funding for the 2022 Queens Platinum Jubilee Celebrations
Proposed by Councillor Julia Judd, Seconded by Councillor Stephen Hirst.
Council noted that this motion would be considered by the Cabinet as it had financial implications.
Councillor Julia Judd provided further context around the motion and requested that a figure of £500 per ward Member be added to the motion so that the final paragraph then read:
‘This council therefore resolves to set aside specific community funding of £500 per Ward Member to support communities to run special events over the weekend, enabling them to kick-start their plans to organise a one off never to be forgotten event’.
Councillor Mike Evemy expressed a view that due to the financial implications arising from the revisions to the motion, it was appropriate for the matter to be considered formally at Cabinet so further work on the financial details could be completed.
RESOLVED that the matter would be formally considered by Cabinet at its November 2021 meeting.
c) Motion – Cotswold Shopping Festival
Proposed by Councillor Richard Morgan, Seconded by Councillor Stephen Hirst.
RESOLVED that this motion was withdrawn.
d) Motion – Dog Waste Bin Provision
Proposed by Councillor Julia Judd.
RESOLVED that this motion was withdrawn.
e) Motion – 20mph is Plenty Where People Are
Proposed by Councillor Jenny Forde, Seconded by Councillor Andrew Doherty.
Councillor Jenny Forde provided further context around the motion.
Councillor Andrew Doherty expressed his support for the motion.
Councillor Roly Hughes expressed is support for the motion.
Councillor Stephen Hirst addressed the Council and informed members that Gloucestershire County Council had every intention of adopting 20mph maximum speed limits in areas where vulnerable road users and vehicles mixed.
Councillor Lisa Spivey expressed her support for the motion.
Councillor Rachel Coxcoon expressed her support for the motion.
Councillor Clive Webster expressed his support for the motion.
Councillor Stephen Andrews addressed the Council and emphasised the importance of continuing to lobby partners to achieve the amending of speed limits.
Councillor Ray Theodoulou addressed the Council and expressed ... view the full minutes text for item 35. |
|
|
Next meeting Wednesday 17 November 2021 – 2pm Additional documents: Minutes: Wednesday 17 November 2021 – 2pm |