Agenda and draft minutes
PDF 155 KBVenue: the Council Chamber - Council Offices, Trinity Road, Cirencester, GL7 1PX. View directions
Contact: Democratic Services
Media
| No. | Item | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Apologies To receive any apologies for absence. The quorum for Council is 9 members.
Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillors Chris Twells, Nikki Ind, Tony Dale and Tristan Wilkinson.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Declarations of Interest To receive any declarations of interest from Members relating to items to be considered at the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Andrew Maclean noted his name on the report in respect of appointing a temporary Parish Council Member for Upper Rissington but it had been agreed that he had no pecuniary interest.
The Chair then made a statement regarding the Publica Review. The following points were made:
The Publica Shareholder Councils had taken legal advice about whether officers employed by the Publica Group whose roles were in scope for the phase 1 transition to direct Council employment needed to declare an interest and/or leave the room.
Whilst officers do not have an “interest” in public-law decision making unlike the decision-makers (i.e. Councillors), there was a need to avoid the appearance of bias.
Therefore, officers employed by the Publica Group who were in scope for the phase 1 transition, such as Democratic Services officers, would leave the room for the duration of the item.
Any officers employed by the Publica Group who were acting as Deputy Statutory Officers or otherwise advising members in relation to the Publica Transition item were able to stay in the room. This was because, in the view of the Council’s Monitoring Officer, the need for Members to receive answers to questions outweighed the risk of any appearance of bias. |
|||||||||||||
|
To confirm the minutes of the meetings of Council held on 20 March 2024 and 15 May 2024. Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the Full Council meetings on 20 March 2024 and 15 May 2024 were considered as part of the published pack.
There were two minor typographical amendments raised by Councillor Neill were noted on 20 March 2024 minutes under the Chair Announcements item which would be updated.
Councillor David Fowles queried where the apologies were for the previous meeting on 15 May 2024. It was confirmed by email after the meeting that these were present in the document but were not in the usual place because of the format of the Annual Meeting agenda.
* Due to a technical error, Councillor Helene Mansilla’s vote was incorrectly noted electronically as ‘Against’ and was corrected verbally to ‘Abstain’.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Announcements from the Chair, Leader or Chief Executive (if any) To receive any announcements from the Chair of the Council, the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive. Additional documents: Minutes: The Vice- Chair started this item by welcoming both Dr Roz Savage MP and Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP and congratulating them on their election to the South Cotswolds and North Cotswold parliamentary constituencies respectively. It was hoped that they could be present at a future Council meeting to engage with Members on national considerations.
The Vice-Chair read announcements on behalf of the Chair who was not able to be in attendance:
The Chair had been in attendance for a number of gatherings on behalf of the Council: Mayor of Evesham Gathering for Civic Leaders, D-Day and Armed Forces Day Commemorations and the Annual Kiribati Tungaru gathering in Chedworth Village Hall.
An update was given on the Chair’s Cotswold Way Challenge Walk to commemorate 50 years of Cotswold District Council. 8 out of the 12 stages had been completed alongside other representatives from the charities supported, Council Officers and family members.
The Vice-Chair also noted the following announcements:
· The Unsung Heroes award would be launching for nominations on 1 August to recognise the contributions of volunteers in the District.
· There would be an event on 25 September 2024 for the 50th Anniversary of the Council. The Council delivered over 50 different services within the District that supported communities.
The Leader, Councillor Joe Harris, was then invited to make the following announcements:
· The Leader congratulated both Dr. Roz Savage and Sir Geoffrey Clifton Brown on their election victories. The Leader also noted the importance of the General Election in engaging with residents and encouraging participation in democracy.
· The Leader noted the optimism regarding the new government and the need for the local government sector to be supported during the difficult financial challenges. There was a need for multi-year funding settlements to be able to make informed decisions on service delivery and capital investments.
· The Leader noted that the housing target from the Government had changed which would require 300 more homes to be built per year. In doing so, some points were noted in relation to housing.
· Tough decisions were required with communities to deliver more homes to buy and to rent.
· Affordable housing was required to help those in the District to support communities particularly for those like carers to support the ageing population.
· The priority for the administration was to deliver more socially rented housing.
· The Council needed to meet housing targets and if it failed to meet the requirements, the Council could lose control of where and how those homes were built.
· The whole Council was committed to get feedback from residents but there needed to be honesty about the requirements being asked of the Council.
· There were three Olympians competing in the Paris Olympic Games from the Cotswolds: Laura Collett and Tom McEwen in Equestrian events and Alex Cohoon in the swimming events and the Leader wished to wish them the best of luck.
The Chief Executive was then invited to make any announcements:
· Congratulations were given to the MPs for the North and South Cotswolds on their ... view the full minutes text for item 15. |
|||||||||||||
|
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 one minute each and relate to issues under the Council’s remit. At any one meeting no person may submit more than two questions and no more than two such questions may be asked on behalf of one organisation.
The Chair will ask whether any members of the public present at the meeting wish to ask a question and will decide on the order of questioners.
The response may take the form of: a) a direct oral answer; b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication; or c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner. Additional documents: Minutes: The Vice-Chair then invited the first public speaker to ask their question.
Councillor Mike Cameron Davies of Sapperton Parish Council asked a question regarding waste collection issues. Whilst recognising that the recent round reorganisation was required for the Council’s budget, it was felt that the Council did not take appropriate action to mitigate the impact on those affected. Frampton Mansell was used as an example of an area where bin collections had not been consistent to the new timetable. The question asked was if the Council agreed that this was a pretty poorly planned and executed change that should not be repeated, and what lessons have been learned from this?
The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Mike Evemy, responded as the portfolio holder for waste and recycling and apologised to residents who had been inconvenienced from the changes. It was highlighted that officers within Publica and Ubico had been working hard on implementing the changes. It was affirmed that the planning work for the changes had been underway since November 2023, with the issues arising from the logistics implementing the change. There was a desire to minimise further disruptions on waste collections and it was noted that extra resources had been put in to the project. It was highlighted that missed bin collections had fallen week on week after an initial increase in missed bin collections.
A supplementary question was asked by Councillor Mike Cameron Davies about clarifying how the Council would proceed from here and work in a smarter way and how lessons would be learnt.
The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Evemy, stated that officers were to rectify any current issues and noted the complexities of the locations of properties in the District. Whilst stating that the change wasn’t recognised as being a failure, there would be lessons to be learnt for any future changes required and that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee would have a role in scrutinising any such changes.
Ben Eddols asked a public question regarding the proposed Stow and the Swells Neighbourhood Development Plan. It was highlighted that many volunteers’ hours had been put into developing the plan since 2011 to improve the local community such as affordable housing, improving parking spaces and finding a permanent space for Stow Town Council. The main part of the plan had been rejected by the Inspector. In addition, Stow Town Council were currently in negotiations with Cotswold District Council regarding the future of the public toilets. It was felt that it was wrong that the residents should cover the £15,000 annual loss through the precept. It was asked why Stow Town Council should exist given the perceived lack of control over events in the communities.
The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Evemy, wished to pick up the point about the toilets. It was noted that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had conducted a review through the Public Conveniences Working Group. The review had highlighted the ... view the full minutes text for item 16. |
|||||||||||||
|
A Member of the Council may ask the Chair, the Leader, a Cabinet Member or the Chair of any Committee a question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties or which affects the Cotswold District. A maximum period of fifteen minutes shall be allowed at any such meeting for Member questions.
A Member may only ask a question if: a) the question has been delivered in writing or by electronic mail to the Chief Executive no later than 5.00 p.m. on the working day before the day of the meeting; or b) the question relates to an urgent matter, they have the consent of the Chair to whom the question is to be put and the content of the question is given to the Chief Executive by 9.30 a.m. on the day of the meeting.
An answer may take the form of: a) a direct oral answer; b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication; or c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner.
The following questions were submitted before the publication of the agenda:
Question 1 from Councillor Jon Wareing to Councillor Tony Dale, Cabinet Member for Economy and Council Transformation The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) defines over-tourism as “the impact of tourism on a destination, or parts thereof, that excessively influences perceived quality of life of citizens and/or quality of visitor experiences in a negative way”. Does the Cabinet Member responsible for the Economy and Council Transformation agree with me that Bourton-on-the-Water suffers from over-tourism on this basis, and will he commit to ensuring that Bourton can develop an approach to sustainable tourism whilst building a more resilient economy with retail services for the residents of Bourton and the wider North Cotswolds? This should include prioritising parking for residents and looking to support parking for visitor traffic on the periphery of the village.
Question 2 from Councillor Dilys Neill to Councillor Juliet Layton, Cabinet Member for Planning and Regulatory Services Here is a quote from the submitted Neighbourhood development plan for Stow & The Swells MAIN PLANNING ISSUES • During the mid Twentieth Century a substantial amount of social housing was built in two major developments – King Georges Field and the Park estate. A substantial number of these properties have passed into private hands under the Right to Buy and have not been replaced. There is only limited turnover in the remaining social housing. • Stow, a compact hilltop community within the AONB, has a tight development boundary. Most developments in recent years have been minor infill developments within the development boundary. Stow’s attractiveness has resulted in high prices well beyond the reach of almost all local residents. There has been an increase in the number of second homes. The private rented sector has seen a significant shift towards holiday lettings pricing local people out of that market also. This ... view the full agenda text for item 17. Additional documents:
Minutes: Member Questions with written responses and supplementary responses are attached at the Annex A. |
|||||||||||||
|
Publica Review - Detailed report Purpose To consider the Detailed Transition Plan, to note its content and to approve the recommendations therein.
Recommendations That, subject to the resolutions of Cabinet on 25 July 2024, Full Council resolves to: 1. Approve the implementation of Phase 1 of the Publica Transition based on the Detailed Transition Plan and the phasing for the transition. 2. Delegate to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, the decision to deal with any final detail matters arising from the Detailed Transition Plan. 3. Delegate authority to the Director of Governance and Development (Monitoring Officer), in liaison with the Leader, to update the constitution by making any consequential changes required as a result of Phase 1 of the Publica Transition. 4. Carry out a budget re-basing for the 2026/7 financial year so that the funding provided to Publica is proportionate to the services received. 5. Note that following the decision on Phase 1, preparatory work for Phase 2 will commence and will be the subject of a separate report 6. Note the following as included in the Detailed Transition Plan; Section 2: Transition Planning: · Note the Design-Led principles · Note the Key Goals for Transition Section 7: Modelling Assumptions and Outputs: · Note the cost modelling for Phase 1. Section 9: Post-Transition Support: · Note the need for post-transition support.
Additional documents:
Minutes: The purpose of the report was to consider the Detailed Transition Plan, to note its content and to approve the recommendations therein.
The Chair invited those Publica officers who felt that they should leave the room to do so.
The Chair then invited the Leader of the Council, Councillor Joe Harris, to introduce the item. The following points were made:
· There were concerns about the sovereignty of the Council over its staff and the attractiveness of the Council as an employer at the time of introducing Publica in 2017.
· The Leader noted his own vote against the establishment of Publica as an organisation at that time.
· The concerns were noted as being manifested as part of the Council’s current day-to-day operations during his time as Leader.
· The misgivings around Publica were not a reflection on the staff who work hard at the Council across a range of areas who support people and businesses across the District.
· The Leader wished to thank all staff for their work and noted that they were the Council’s greatest asset to deliver the Council’s priorities.
· The Leader noted that the transition of services would put staff at the forefront of the process to ensure they can deliver to the best of their ability.
· Phase 1 would return staff to the Council and set the Council’s brand and identity as it becomes a major employer in the District once again.
· The report outlined the need to define what success looks like for the Council and how the future of the Council’s services would look.
· The Overview and Scrutiny Committee were thanked for their work in scrutinising the report and providing constructive feedback. Following this, the Leader proposed an additional recommendation to the report which read as follows:
7. Note the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and therefore ask officers to work with members to clarify and define what success for the Council and continuing Publica will look like and the values that will underpin this success in order to improve efficiency and enhance services for residents, businesses and community organisations in the district.
· The Leader noted that a lot of the change required would take time but this was the beginning of the journey and the priority was to complete the Phase 1 transition of staff at pace.
· It was noted that the short-term and medium-term financial assumptions were clear but that unforeseen costs were possible and that mitigation measures would need to be prepared.
· It was highlighted that the transfer of staff would help to prepare the Council for the need to respond to the changes likely to take place in the local government sector.
· This was an opportunity to reset the Council as an employer and to ensure all employees feel valued and empowered in their roles.
· In the 50th Anniversary year of the Council, it was noted that this would be a significant moment in the history of the organisation.
The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Mike Evemy ... view the full minutes text for item 18.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Business And Planning Act 2020 - Update To Pavement Licensing Regime Purpose For Full Council to consider the draft Pavement License Policy document for approval following the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act making permanent the pavement licensing regime.
Recommendation That Full Council resolves to: 1. Approve the draft Pavement Licensing Policy and Fees, attached at Annex A. Additional documents: Minutes: The purpose of the report was for Full Council to consider the draft Pavement License Policy document for approval following the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act making permanent the pavement licensing regime.
Councillor Juliet Layton introduced the report and made the following points:
· The Planning and Licensing Committee as a consultee approved the draft policy at its meeting on 12 June 2024.
· The report contained the draft policy following the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act which made Pavement Licensing a permanent regime.
· The original regime was introduced in 2020 under the Business and Planning Act to extend the trading area for food and drink to outside spaces during the Coronavirus Pandemic. Businesses would need to apply to the Council for a licence to utilise this.
· The Council had issued 12 licences across the District.
· The draft policy reflected changes in legislation which included:
· increasing the consultation period to 28 days
· expanding licence validation to 24 months
· increasing the capped fee to £500 and the renewal fee to £350.
· Expanding enforcement powers for the Council.
· Licences granted prior to 30 March 2024 would be valid until the end of the expiration date.
· A cost recovery principle underpinned the draft policy with a new licence costing £185 for a new 24 months licence and £150 for a renewal.
· It was stated that this move would give certainty for business in the District.
Councillor Ray Brassington seconded and made the following points:
· Any objections to a pavement licence application would be reviewed by officers in consultation with himself as Chair of Planning and Licensing Committee.
· The change to a 28 day consultation period was welcomed to improve responses from the public.
Council noted the encouraging policy from the Covid Pandemic on pavement licensing for communities in an orderly way.
Council noted the entrepreneurs in the Cotswold using pavement licences which would be of benefit to businesses.
Council asked about the 14-day public consultation and how that was carried out. The Business Manager - Environmental, Welfare & Revenue Service answered and stated that Highways and other public bodies would be consulted. It was noted these applications were also posted online for residents to raise any objections. Council asked about the 28 day minimum consultation and whether this was enough time. The Business Manager answered that the statutory consultees did respond quite efficiently normally to these applications.
Council noted the clarity for businesses in the District that the policy would provide.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2023/24 Purpose To receive the annual report of the work of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
Recommendation That Full Council resolves to: 1. Note the Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2023/24. Additional documents:
Minutes: The purpose of the report was to receive the annual report of the work of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for the 2023/24 Civic Year.
Councillor Blomefield as Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee introduced the report:
· Thanked the members of the Committee who had contributed to the work of the Committee over the past year. Specifically Councillor Selwyn as Vice-Chair and Councillor Clare Turner who had stood in as a Vice-Chair. · The Chair also thanked the officers involved in the running of the Committee. · It was noted that this was the first time a report had been received by Full Council in respect of the work done by the Committee. · The report highlighted the progress made by the Committee, in particular in relation to Task and Finish Groups and the special meeting held with Great Western Railway. · The Overview and Scrutiny Committee had also made a positive contribution through the recommendations to Cabinet. Many of these recommendations had been accepted as part of the recommendations.
Council noted thanks from Cabinet Members for the development of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to being an effective ‘critical friend’ of the Executive.
Council noted the difference made by Public Conveniences Working group in its work regarding the future of public conveniences through cross-party working.
Many Members commended the chairing skills of Councillor Blomefield in guiding the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and improving the work of the Committee.
It was highlighted that the questions by Committee members to Cabinet Members as the leading policy makers helped to examine proposals to Cabinet and Council.
Councillor Blomefield in summing up noted about liaising with the Leader and other Cabinet Members to discuss more in advance about the work of the Committee through work planning sessions.
RESOLVED: Full Council NOTED the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2023/24.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Decision taken under Urgency Powers Purpose To report to Full Council on a decision taken by the Chief Executive Officer under urgency powers.
Recommendation That Full Council resolves to: 1. Note the decision taken as set out in Annex A. Additional documents: Minutes: The purpose of the report was for Council to note the decision taken by the Chief Executive using Urgency Powers.
The Leader, Councillor Joe Harris introduced the report and made the following points:
· The Full Council meeting date had changed due to the General Election pre-election period which moved other meetings such as Cabinet and Overview and Scrutiny Committee. · As Full Council needs to agree its own meeting date changes and was unable to, the Chief Executive used the Urgency Powers within the Constitution to action the change.
There were no comments on this item.
RESOLVED: Full Council NOTED the decision taken. |
|||||||||||||
|
Appointment and Remuneration of Independent Persons Purpose To appoint Independent Persons for standards matters, commence a subsequent recruitment campaign, and approve allowances payable.
Recommendations That Full Council resolves to:
Additional documents: Minutes: The purpose of this report was to appoint Independent Persons for standards matters and approve allowances payable.
The Leader of the Council, Councillor Joe Harris, introduced this item and made the following points:
· The Localism Act 2011 required that at least one independent member was appointed to assist the Monitoring Officer in assessing code of conduct complaints against District and Town and Parish Councillors.
· There had been an uptick in complaints, particularly in relation to Town and Parish Councillors.
· Independent persons could advise the Councillor accused of breaching the Code of Conduct and this was usually not required.
· The large increase in complaints required the Council to reinforce its arrangements for assessing these complaints.
· One of the Independent Members also sat on the Council’s Independent Renumeration Panel.
· Two of the Independent Persons would be re-appointed but two new Independent Persons would be appointed following a retirement. This followed a recruitment campaign and interview where Robert Cawley and Melvin Kenyon met the requirements needed.
The Director of Governance and Development (Monitoring Officer) was then invited to speak to the item and made the following points:
· The increase in complaints was highlighted in the report to the Audit and Governance Committee on 23 July 2024.
· The independent persons were important individuals to support the process for maintaining standards.
Councillor David Fowles seconded and noted the hard work of the Director of Governance and Development in dealing with complex cases. A question arose regarding the format of meetings with the independent persons given their distance from the area. The Director of Governance and Development noted that most of the contact was via video conference but for Standards Hearings, these would need to be held in person. It was also confirmed the mileage paid would be at the same rate as for Councillors.
Councillor Mike Evemy wished to note for the record that Michael Paget-Wilkes was known to him as he played in the same tennis club. However, he did not otherwise socialise with him and this would not be a pecuniary interest.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Appointment of a Temporary Parish Council Member to Upper Rissington Parish Council Purpose To agree the appointment of a temporary member of Upper Rissington Parish Council, enabling the Parish Council to become quorate and to update the appointment arrangements, allowing delegation of this function to the Director of Governance and Development (Monitoring Officer).
Recommendations That Full Council resolves to: 1. Agree to make an order under Section 91 of the Local Government Act 1972 (‘the Act’) appointing Councillor Andrew Maclean as a temporary member of Upper Rissington Parish Council enabling Upper Rissington Parish Council to become quorate; 2. Note that the appointment shall be effective until Upper Rissington Parish Council is quorate (i.e. it has four members of the Council in place, excepting the temporary appointee); 3. Approve the draft procedure at Annex A, delegating authority to the Monitoring Officer to make orders and make temporary appointments to Town/Parish Councils as required, under the powers in Section 91of the Act. Additional documents:
Minutes: The purpose of the report was to appoint Independent Persons for standards matters, commence a subsequent recruitment campaign, and approve allowances payable.
The Leader, Councillor Joe Harris proposed the recommendations within the report and outlined the following points:
· Parish Councils must be quorate to operate and make decisions which meant a minimum of 3 Members or 1/3 of its membership.
· Section 91 of the Local Government Act dealt with situations where a Town/Parish Council becomes inquorate, making provisions for the District Council to co-opt a member of its own on to the Town or Parish Council.
· Upper Rissington Parish Council was now inquorate after the resignation of several members of its own Council.
· Councillor Andrew Maclean would therefore be co-opted on to the Council in order for the Council to co-opt new members.
· The clerk of Upper Rissington Parish Council had advised that there was interest in the community and that it should be able to become quorate shortly.
· Council had approved a procedure in 2021 to allow appointments to be delegated to the Chief Executive in order for Council to co-opt.
Councillor Tom Stowe seconded the proposal and made the following points:
· Councillor Maclean was thanked for stepping up to the role.
· There was a question about problems in recruitment of Town and Parish Councils and whether this was a wider trend. The Director of Governance and Development replied anecdotally that there did seem to be a wider national trend in recruiting this voluntary role. It was also a prominent issue locally given that Cotswold had a large number of Town and Parish Councils in the District.
Councillor Maclean noted there was a large number of younger people in the village due to the siting of an ex-RAF base.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Notice of Motions In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12, the following Motions have been received:-
Motion A: Cotswold Lakes
Proposer: Councillor Juliet Layton Seconder: Councillor Mike Evemy
This Council notes the aspiration from local businesses, Town and Parish Councils, Cotswold Lakes Trust and Cotswold Tourism to change the name of the Cotswold Water Park to the Cotswold Lakes. The area has been formed from around 50 years of gravel extraction over three counties of Gloucestershire, Wiltshire, and Oxfordshire. In 1967 the counties formed a Joint Committee which includes the three counties representation along with Cirencester Rural District Council and Cricklade and Wootton Bassett Rural District Council. The Joint Committee named the lakes area the Cotswold Water Park, wrote a Master Plan and created in 1996 The Cotswold Water Park Society to help deliver four main aims – Access, Conservation, Leisure and Education. The Cotswold Water Park Society became a fully registered charity in 2011 and recently changed its name to Cotswold Lakes Trust. This Council also notes that the name Cotswold Water Park causes confusion for the many visitors who come each year and ask where the Park is, how much it costs etc. The idea of a Water Park is a single venue providing swimming, water slides, pools, play areas and provision of food outlets. It is estimated that approximately 1,000,000 come to spend leisure time in the CWP every year and most do not know that that it is a vast area of over 180 lakes with multiple land owners and businesses. This Council believes in this unique area and the value of its lakes and landscapes for wildlife and nature and home for 35,000 wintering birds, the value of its properties for health and wellbeing for residents and visitors and the benefits of the businesses which run leisure facilities, activities on the lakes in various forms of water sports, fishing and walking, and the value of the Cotswold Lakes Trust which owns two country parks, 5 car parks, and 5 nature reserves. Natural England values the lakes highly and extended the original SSSI on 10 lakes in 1984 to 170 lakes in 2021. This Council resolves to:
Additional documents: Minutes: The one motion tabled was titled Cotswold Lakes.
Councillor Juliet Layton introduced the motion and made the following points:
· This motion was to ask that Council acknowledge the desire of the Cotswold Lakes Trust for the change of name from Cotswold Water Park to Cotswold Lakes. It would also formalise the name change within the constituent authorities of which Cotswold District Council was one.
· In April 2024, Councillor Layton and Councillor Evemy were invited as the local ward members to discuss with businesses and the Trust about changing the name along with Council tourism officers.
· The steering group had consulted Town and Parish Councils within the locality and all were supportive of the proposals.
· It was noted that about the named Cotswold Water Park caused some confusion.
· The decision had been taken by the Trust to market the area more appropriately.
· The motion was to formalise the name into the constituent authorities.
Councillor Mike Evemy seconded and made the following points:
· Councillor Evemy noted that other Councillors attended the meeting with the Trust to discuss the proposal.
· The motion was a public statement in supporting the change.
· The business involved would be changing its name to adapt to the new name as they recognised the benefits of doing so.
· New signs would be required over time and this would be done as signs were replaced in partnership.
· The Council would update its Local Plan and other documents to support this.
Council asked if there would be cost implications for Cotswold District Council. Councillor Evemy clarified that the signage change could cost some money, but this would need to be clarified as to which organisation owned the signs. There was a street signage budget and any old signs being replaced would be updated to the new name.
It was noted by the Vice-Chair that the name was changing anyway but it was whether the Council supported this change.
Council noted the importance of putting the Cotswold Lakes on the map in regarding to its landscape and the work of the Cotswold Lakes Trust.
It was highlighted that it was important to get the partner authorities and other parties required together to make the name change happen.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Next meeting The next meeting of Council will be held on Wednesday 25 September 2024 at 14:00. Additional documents: Minutes: The next meeting of Full Council was confirmed to be on 25 September 2024 at 2pm.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Matters exempt from publication If Council wishes to exclude the press and the public from the meeting during consideration of any of the items on the exempt from publication part of the agenda, it will be necessary for Council to pass a resolution in accordance with the provisions of section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that their presence could involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in specific paragraphs of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.
Council may maintain the exemption if and so long as, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair then moved the following motion which was seconded by Mike Evemy
RESOLVED: That Full Council exclude the press and the public from the meeting during consideration of item 16 in accordance with provisions of section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that their presence could involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.
Voting Record
30 For, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions, 4 Absent/Did not vote
|
|||||||||||||
|
Decision on future regeneration of The Old Station and Memorial Cottages, Cirencester Purpose To consider the Asset Plans for these buildings produced as part of the Council's Asset Management Strategy and consider disposal of these buildings in line with those Asset Plans.
Recommendations That, subject to the resolutions of Cabinet on 25 July 2024, Full Council resolves to: 1. Agree that the Old Station and Old Memorial cottages are disposed of, as two separate assets, in line with the Asset Management Strategy adopted at Cabinet in May 2024 and the Asset Plans appended to this report. 2. Delegate authority to the Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer, in consultation with the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance to approve the final terms of the sale including sale price. Minutes: The purpose of the report was to consider the Asset Plans for the Old Station and Memorial Cottage buildings produced as part of the Council's Asset Management Strategy and consider disposal of these buildings in line with those Asset Plans.
Full Council discussed the report in private session.
The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Mike Evemy and seconded by Councillor Joe Harris.
|
Carried