Agenda and minutes
PDF 61 KBVenue: Parkside Suite - Parkside. View directions
Contact: Sheena Jones Rosemary Cole / Amanda Scarce / Pauline Ross
| No. | Item | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
To receive apologies for absence Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors S. R. Colella, B. T. Cooper and J. M. L. A. Griffiths. |
|||||||
|
Declarations of Interest To invite Councillors to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Disclosable Interests they may have in items on the agenda, and to confirm the nature of those interests. Minutes: No declarations of interest were received. |
|||||||
|
Additional documents: Minutes: During consideration of the minutes from the meeting held on 26th April 2017 a number of points of clarification were raised.
Councillor L. C. R. Mallett referred to Minute No. 109/16 and the implications arising from it and in particular parts (b) and (d) of the resolution in respect of the Local Transport Plan No 4 Consultation. The Portfolio Holder, Councillor C. B. Taylor, responded that the issue was ongoing and further information would be feedback to Group Leaders at a meeting due to be held on 23rd June 2017. Discussion followed as to whether part (d) of the resolution clearly covered all the points which had been discussed at the Council meeting as it was clearly agreed that funds up to £150k would be made available for the relevant work to be carried out with immediate effect. It was believed that this had not been the case and that a further delay in that work would have a negative impact going forward. Councillor Taylor also confirmed that this matter would be discussed at the meeting arranged for 23rd June 2017.
The Chairman agreed to an adjournment to enable a way forward to be discussed.
Following the adjournment it was agreed that the minutes would be amended to reflect that officers had been authorised to carry out the work with immediate effect and that £150k had been set aside to cover the cost of that work.
Councillor Mallett requested that an urgent notice of motion be considered by the Council to not accept the surveys which had been carried out by Worcestershire County Council and Highways England and as a result of this Council furthermore does not accept the data for any planning applications of ten or more units, until the Council has carried out its own highways review. This motion was seconded by Councillor M. Thompson and agreed to by the Chairman in accordance with the Council Procedure Rules in respect of urgent business.
During the ensuing debate the following areas were discussed:
· Despite concerns it appeared that Worcestershire County Council (WCC) Highways was currently carrying out its own survey. · The inappropriate timing of this survey, would not give a true picture, as it was being carried out whilst there had been numerous road works taking place. · The fact that the Leader of the County Council had acknowledged that there were issues regarding the traffic counting and the ongoing road works in the District of Bromsgrove. · It was understood that there were particular times of the year when surveys should be carried out in order to get a good, fair and accurate overview of the situation. · The cost to the tax payer of the work which had been carried out. · How Members concerns had been raised at WCC with the Leader, the relevant Portfolio Holder and a number of officers with negative responses having been received. · A suggested meeting between the Group Leaders from the District, together with Councillor Taylor as the relevant Portfolio Holder, with ... view the full minutes text for item 13\17 |
|||||||
|
To receive any announcements from the Chairman and/or Head of Paid Service Minutes: The Chairman reminded Members that following the announcement at the previous meeting a number of charities had been nominated by residents to be her nominated charity. After much deliberation she confirmed that she had chosen NewStarts who provided an excellent service to the most vulnerable and those in the greatest of need in the District.
The Chairman also took the opportunity to welcome Councillor K. Van Der Plank to her first Council meeting, following her election as Ward Member for Alvechurch Village at the recent by-election. |
|||||||
|
To receive any announcements from the Leader Minutes: In the aftermath of the tragic events at Grenfell Tower in London the Leader of the Council took the opportunity to make a statement about the local situation.
He began by saying that everyone affected by the fire was very much in everyone’s thoughts at this time and offered their heartfelt condolences to all concerned.
As part of the response to the tragedy, Melanie Dawes CB, Permanent Secretary at the Department of Communities and Local Government, wrote to all local authorities and housing associations on 18th June 2017. This letter requested checks to be undertaken by the Council in relation to the use of a particular type of cladding called Aluminium Composite Material (ACM) on new build or refurbished buildings more than 18 metres high in their area. I can confirm that the Council provided a return to the DCLG on 19th June advising that there were no properties of this type in the district.
Alongside our own checks, the Council has also written separately to the 13 housing associations operating in the Bromsgrove area to ensure they received the original letter from DCLG, and offering a central point of contact at the Council should they require any further assistance.
During this item Councillor M. Thompson requested that the Leader invite Sajid Javid M.P. to attend a future meeting of the Council to give him the opportunity to inform Members of the work he hoped to carry out in order to meet the various needs of the District. The Leader agreed to invite the M.P. to attend the next time he saw him. |
|||||||
|
To receive comments, questions or petitions from members of the public A period of up to 15 minutes is allowed for members of the public to make a comment, ask questions or present petitions. Each member of the public has up to 3 minutes to do this. A councillor may also present a petition on behalf of a member of the public.
Minutes: There were no public comments, questions or petitions on this occasion.
|
|||||||
|
Appointment of Committees 2017/18 Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor G. N. Denaro proposed that this report be considered at the next meeting. It was explained that from the mathematical calculation there had been a slight change to the political balance following the recent by-election. There were now 27 committee places for the Conservative Group with 9 each for the Independent Alliance and Labour Group. As detailed in the appendix at present the four unallocated places referred to would remain vacant until the Leaders’ of the Independent Alliance and Labour Group had come to an agreement on the allocation thereof. |
|||||||
|
Recommendation from the Licensing Committee - 12th June 2017 To consider a potential recommendation from the Licensing Committee on the adoption of a draft position statement with respect to Sections 165-167 of the Equality Act 2010.
Additional documents:
Minutes: The recommendation from the Licensing Committee was proposed by Councillor P. J. Whittaker and seconded by Councillor G. N. Denaro.
In proposing the recommendation Councillor Whittaker referred to a report considered by the Licensing Committee at its meeting on 12th June and in respect of the recently enacted provisions of Sections 165 to 167 Access for Wheelchair users to Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles, of the Equality Act 2010, which was detailed within the appendices. As a result of the change to the law, drivers of designated wheelchair accessible taxi and private hire vehicles had a number of obligations and those drivers found to be discriminating against wheelchair users faced fines of up to £1,000. It was highlighted that the Council maintains a list of designated vehicles. It was the Council’s intention to include within the list contact details of the companies and/or drivers’ which owned these vehicles. Currently this was not necessary under the legislation and the officers would first need to have the permission of those operators/drivers to include this information, this exercise was currently underway.
During the course of the debate Members highlighted the following areas:
· Clarity in the inclusion of contact details on the list (it was highlighted by Councillor C. M. McDonald that the current list only included the type of vehicle and registration number which was of no use to someone needing to access these vehicles). · The limitations of the legislation and flaws within it. · Consideration by the Licensing Committee of a recent survey of drivers and the contents of that survey. · The number of adopted vehicles available to residents within the District. · Confirmation from a Legal position that the need to have permission from the drivers in the first instance was needed to enable the Council to publish contact details on its website.
The Head of Legal, Equalities and Democratic Services clarified that the requirement to keep the list of WCAV was merely to enable to Council to enforce the requirement of the Equalities Act 2010 by ensuring that there was a list of those vehicles which were designated as wheelchair accessible. It was an entirely separate matter for those drivers who wished to provide their details to have those made publicly accessible for those wishing to use wheelchair accessible vehicles, for clarification the two were entirely separate.
An amendment to the recommendation was proposed by Councillor C. McDonald and seconded by Councillor S. P. Shannon that all wheelchair accessible vehicles licensed in Bromsgrove on the designated list provide contact details of the operators.
On being put to the vote the amendment was declared lost.
RESOLVED that the Council adopts the draft position statement with respect to sections 165 to 167 of the Equality Act 2010, as detailed in Appendix 2 of the report.
|
|||||||
|
Recommendations from the Cabinet To consider the recommendations from the meeting of the Cabinet held on 14th June 2017
· Revised Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2017/18 to 2019/20
· Facility Management and Cleaning Service Review Business Case (the background papers to this item are confidential)
· Parks and Open Spaces Review Business Case (the background papers to this item are confidential)
· Legal, Equalities and Democratic Services Review Business Case (the background papers to this item are confidential)
(The background papers to the recommendations are contained at the back of the Council Agenda book) Minutes: Revised Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2017/18 to 2019/20
The recommendation from Cabinet in respect of the Revised Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2017/18 to 2019/20 was proposed by Councillor G. N. Denaro and seconded by Councillor K. J. May.
In proposing the recommendation Councillor Denaro confirmed that Cabinet had considered a report on the proposed revision of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy to increase the Council’s authorised and operational borrowing limit by £6m. It was further highlighted that the Council had entered into an agreement to pay Worcestershire Pension Fund pension payments for the next three years in advance, which after allowing for any temporary borrowing costs would result in a saving of £137k per annum for three years.
During the following debate a number of Members expressed difficulty in understanding the figures within the report and whether there had been a decrease in the interest rate, clarity was also sought as to whether the increase in borrowing was to cover the Pension Fund payments or as a result of these. The level of borrowing currently needed was also of concern and how this had increased significantly in recent years.
It was confirmed that the Pension Fund payment had been made and had been included within the Medium Term Financial Plan and how the savings would be received over the three year period. Officers offered to provide a detailed schedule outside of the meeting to enable Members to better understand the reasoning behind the request and the savings.
Councillor L. C. R. Mallett questioned the legality of making a decision on this item without the supporting evidence and detail. The Executive Director, Finance and Resources explained that an authorised limit was needed for additional borrowings over the next three months to ensure the Council met its legal requirement.
The Chairman agreed to an adjournment to enable a way forward to be discussed.
Following the adjournment it was
RESOLVED that the item be deferred until the next meeting of Council with delegated authority in the interim to the Leaders or Deputy Leaders of each Group in respect of any necessary increase to the Council’s borrowing level.
Facility Management and Cleaning Service Review Business Case Parks and Open Spaces Review Business Case Legal, Equalities and Democratic Services Review Business Case
As it was likely that discussions on these items would involve the exclusion of the public from the meeting the Chairman deferred them to the end of the agenda. |
|||||||
|
To receive the minutes of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 14th June 2017 Minutes: The Minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 14th June 2017 were received for information. |
|||||||
|
Questions on Notice A period of up to 15 minutes is allocated for the asking and answering of questions. This may be extended at the discretion of the Chairman with the agreement of the majority of those present.
To deal with any questions on notice from Members of the Council, in the order in which they have been received. Minutes: Question Submitted by Councillor P. M. McDonald
“Now that it would seem the Government is seeking a softer Brexit does the Leader feel that would be in the interest of Bromsgrove residents?”
The Leader responded that there was still a great deal of work to be done on the Brexit negotiations before anyone would be clear as to the impact. However, as Leader he assured Members that he would be watching the negotiations with interest to ensure that any impact on Bromsgrove could be managed and mitigated wherever possible.
Question submitted by Councillor M. Thompson
“During the General Election campaign I spoke to many postal voters who did not receive their voting slip in time to vote. In addition, it was well publicised that many Bromsgrove based voters were given polling cards with addresses ending in Redditch putting many people off voting.
Does the Leader agree with me that shared services have gone too far when mistakes are made that rob the people of Bromsgrove of their democratic right to vote? Wil he confirm how many people could not note because of errors caused by his party’s cost-cutting and what he intends to do to ensure this never happens again?”
The Leader responded that in terms of the error in the supplementary poll cards, it was important that Members appreciated that all of the addresses of electors and their polling stations were correct; the error was that the constituency was printed incorrectly. As soon as this error was discovered the Elections manager issued a press release and contacted all election agents to advise them and the Elections Manager had apologised. Officers were in discussion with the software provider into how this error had happened and would be implementing further checks to ensure it did not happen again. However, it should have been picked up by officers in the proof read; it was not and the Election Manager apologised for this.
In respect of postal voting the Leader advised that in Bromsgrove Constituency nearly 13,000 postal votes were sent out to electors, this was via Royal mail Business Advance in conjunction with Royal Mail Postal Voting Team. This was done in two tranches with our officers travelling to Slough (which was where the postal votes were printed) to quality check the issues and wait to see the votes being loaded on the Royal Mail vans. Out of the Postal Votes issued 87% were returned by close of poll on Election Day. Over 300 were also received which had been delivered to the Polling Stations.
The Leader provided details of the process when a Postal Vote was either lost or had not been received, explaining that under legislation, a replacement could only be issued from four working days before Polling Day up until 5.00 pm on Polling day. It was confirmed that 46 packs were re-issued with not more than 3 re-issues in any one polling district; this is monitored by officers to ensure that there ae no area based issues that ... view the full minutes text for item 21\17 |
|||||||
|
A period of up to one hour is allocated to consider the motions on notice. This may only be extended with the agreement of the Council.
Minutes: Members considered the following notice of motion submitted by Councillor P. M. McDonald:
“In the light of the recent discussions regarding the extending of shared services and the reports made by the Internal Auditors regarding the poor recording of costs allocated between Bromsgrove and Redditch. That this Council calls upon leaders of all parties to come together to immediately carry out a full review of all costs allocated to each Council, to ensure Bromsgrove Council Tax payers are receiving their fair share of services and not subsidising those of Redditch”.
The motion was proposed by Councillor P. McDonald and seconded by Councillor L. C. R. Mallett.
In moving the motion Councillor McDonald shared his concern that chief officers were spending more than there allocated time at Redditch Borough Council, which was leading to a reduction and resources for the Council, together with additional travel costs for staff. Members were informed that he believed there should be an exercise to ensure that every area currently involved in shared services is considered. Councillor McDonald also made reference to the comments made by the Council’s Internal Auditors in respect of the lack of robust records or agreements, to ensure a clear audit trail of transactions between the two Councils. It was reiterated that it was important that the residents of Bromsgrove received a fair deal and that the appropriate services and officers were available to help them.
During the debate a number of points were raised by Councillor G. N. Denaro, in particular it was clarified that the Auditors, either Internal or External had never referred to the cost recording as being poor. Furthermore it had been confirmed that this was not reflective of the work within the audit reviews that had been carried out into the shared services arrangement. It was further confirmed that in respect of the cost allocation, at the meeting of Council on 26th April it was agreed a review would be undertaken by the Chief Executive to verify that the Management Team costs reflected the true time spent at each Authority and Councillor Denaro was happy to extend this to cover all shared services staff costs.
An amendment to the motion was proposed by Councillor G. N. Denaro and seconded by Councillor L. C. R. Mallett that the issue be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Board’s Finance and Budget Working Group to consider the appropriate format and timetable for the review.
On being put to the vote the amendment was declared to be carried. |
|||||||
|
Local Government Act 1972 "RESOLVED: that under Section 100 I of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, the public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act, as amended, the relevant paragraph of that part, in each case, being as set out below, and that it is in the public interest to do so:-
Minutes: The Chairman proposed that the meeting move into private session and before doing so a number of Members questioned whether this was necessary. Particular reference was made to the additional information provided in respect of the Facilities Management and Cleaning Services Review which provided information in respect of the breakdown of costs of the Parkside building. Officers confirmed that this information did not need to be restricted and would be placed in the public domain following the meeting.
Members also debated the report template and how each differed; Councillor Denaro confirmed that this was something which was being considered with a view to a template being created which would ensure that, in future, all reports had a standard format.
Following further discussion it was
RESOLVED
That under Section 100 I of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, the public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the items of business the subject of the following minutes on the grounds that they involved the disclosure of “Exempt information” as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act, the relevant part being as set out below and that it is in the public interest to do so.
Minute No Paragraph
14 4 15 4 16 4 |
|||||||
|
recommendation from Cabinet on Parks and Open Spaces Review Business Case Minutes: The recommendation from Cabinet was proposed by Councillor P. J. Whittaker and seconded by Councillor G. N. Denaro.
In proposing the recommendation Councillor Whittaker referred to the need to get the Parks and Open Spaces Teams working together and centralising the requirements of both Councils. Particular reference was made to the grass cutting and routine grounds maintenance, which currently came under Environmental Services, with the new way of working being trialled since 2015. There was a small saving to the Council of £14,229 with a slightly larger saving of £24,425 for Redditch Borough Council; this was due to a larger requirement for the service. Councillor Whittaker confirmed that this business case had also been to the Shared Services Board, Leader’s Group, Overview and Scrutiny Board and then on to Cabinet before being presented this evening for Members’ consideration.
Following presentation of the report Members debated a number of areas within it:
· What appeared to be a reduction in the service received by the Council. · Consideration as to whether there was scope for a wider review to include combining Leisure and Cultural Services with Environmental Services and the potential savings that could be made. · The limited savings that would be made in comparison to the disruption to staff.
RESOLVED that the proposals set out in the Parks and Open Spaces Review Business Case be approved and implemented.
(During consideration of this item Members discussed matters that necessitated the disclosure of exempt information. It was therefore agreed to exclude the press and public prior to any debate on the grounds that information would be revealed relating to financial and business affairs. However, there is nothing exempt in this record of the proceedings.)
|
|||||||
|
recommendation from Cabinet on Facilities Management and Cleaning Review Business Case Minutes: The recommendation from Cabinet was proposed by Councillor P. J. Whittaker and seconded by Councillor G. N. Denaro.
In proposing the recommendation Councillor Whittaker reminded Members that this report had been through a number of stages before being brought before Council, it had been considered by the Shared Services Board, Leader’s Group, the Overview and Scrutiny Board and then on to Cabinet on 14th June 2017. The Facilities Management and Cleaning Review was carried out in order to form a more efficient and resilient service to both Councils with a small saving of £15k to the Council and a re-charge of that amount also to Worcestershire County Council. It would also be a better use of resources and reduce duplication in some areas and had been informed through the findings of a number of transformation trials..
During the following debate a number of areas were discussed including:
· Taking forward any further shared services business cases when the Council has agreed to carry out a review of those currently in place through the Finance and Budget Working Group. · The service being “hosted” by Redditch Borough Council and any impact this could have on this Council’s services. · The overall small saving which would be made in comparison to the upheaval within the different areas and whether this was justified. · A discrepancy in the breakdown of costs compared to the detail within the report. The Section 151 Officer clarified that the figure included in the additional papers of £158k was that which had been included within the Medium Term Financial Plan for 2017/18. The figure of £454 within the report referred to 2016/17.
RESOLVED that the proposals set out in the Facility Management and Cleaning Review Business Case be approved and implemented.
(During consideration of this item Members discussed matters that necessitated the disclosure of exempt information. It was therefore agreed to exclude the press and public prior to any debate on the grounds that information would be revealed relating to financial and business affairs. However, there is nothing exempt in this record of the proceedings.)
|
|||||||
|
recommendation from Cabinet on Legal, Equalities and Democratic Services Review Business Case Minutes:
The recommendation from Cabinet was proposed by Councillor G. N. Denaro and seconded by Councillor K. J. May.
In proposing the recommendation Councillor Denaro explained that he was presenting the Legal, Equalities and Democratic Services Review Business Case on behalf of the Portfolio Holder, Councillor B. T. Cooper. It was explained that as the Council’s priorities changed the support services need to also change. Following departure of two members of staff the opportunity was taken to re-organise the structure within the department and in particular address the issue of support to the Council’s commercialisation agenda. The transfer over of the Procurement Officer to the Legal and Democratic Team cemented this support. In addition a new structure was proposed for support to Members.
Councillor Denaro drew Members attention to the following positive key points, which resulted from the proposal:
· The creation of a Senior Democratic Services Officer position based at Bromsgrove 5 days a week. · The creation of a Commercial Officer resource to enable the Council to have a link between Economic Development through the North Worcestershire Economic Development and Regeneration (NWEDR) and our Legal Team. Bringing the Procurement Officef into the Team will strengthen that team and support our Efficiency and Medium Term Financial Plan Targets. · Although the redundancy costs appear high against projected savings £45k has been allocated from those savings to fund the Commercial resource. · The quality of the officers in the Legal and Democratic Team and the removal of the fourth tier posts would enable those who have expressed an interest to progress to apply for the new more responsible roles. · The creation of a stronger Procurement Team, which is critical at a time when the Council needs to be looking at savings in every area.
During the following debate a number of issues were raised by Members, including:
· The cost of redundancies against the proposed savings and the level of savings at Redditch. · Support for the proposed structure and the suggested commercial resource and the benefits it would bring to the Council. · The potential to review the commercial resource at a future point and consider the inclusion of any additional income if required. · Support for the structure and in particular the separate democratic senior officers. · How the restructure responded to the needs of the Council and the need for the commercial resource.
RESOLVED that the proposed Legal, Equalities and Democratic Services Review Business case be approved and implemented.
(During consideration of this item Members discussed matters that necessitated the disclosure of exempt information. It was therefore agreed to exclude the press and public prior to any debate on the grounds that information would be revealed relating to financial and business affairs. However, there is nothing exempt in this record of the proceedings.)
|
Copyright Bromsgrove District Council