Agenda and minutes
Venue: Conference Chamber, West Suffolk House, Western Way, Bury St Edmunds, IP33 3YU
Contact: Claire Skoyles
Email: claire.skoyles@westsuffolk.gov.uk
Items
No. |
Item |
318. |
Prayers
Minutes:
The Mayor’s Chaplain, the Venerable Dr
David Jenkins, Archdeacon of Sudbury, opened the meeting with
prayers.
|
319. |
Minutes PDF 258 KB
To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on
19 December 2017 (copy attached).
Minutes:
The minutes of the meeting held on 19 December
2017 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the
Mayor.
|
320. |
Mayor's announcements
Minutes:
The Mayor reported on the civic engagements
and charity activities which he and the Mayoress, and the Deputy Mayor and her Consort had
attended since the last ordinary meeting of Council on 19 December
2017.
|
321. |
Apologies for Absence
To receive announcements (if any) from the
officer advising the Mayor (including apologies for absence)
Minutes:
Apologies for absence were received from
Councillors John Griffiths, Paul Hopfensperger, Betty McLatchy, Ivor McLatchy, Jane Midwood, Karen Richardson, David
Roach, Frank Warby, Patsy Warby and Anthony Williams.
|
322. |
Declarations of Interests
Members are reminded
of their responsibility to declare any pecuniary or local non
pecuniary interest which they have in any item of business on the
agenda no later than when that item is reached and, when
appropriate, to leave the meeting prior to discussion and voting on
the item.
Minutes:
Members declarations of interests are recorded
under the item to which the declaration relates.
|
323. |
Leader's Statement PDF 268 KB
Paper No: COU/SE/18/001
(Council Procedure Rules 8.1
– 8.3) Members may ask the
Leader questions on the content of both his introductory remarks
and the written statement itself.
A total of 30 minutes will be allowed for
questions and responses. There will be a limit of five minutes for
each question to be asked and answered. A supplementary question
arising from the reply may be asked so long as the five minute
limit is not exceeded.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
In the absence of Councillor John Griffiths,
Leader of the Council, Councillor Sara Mildmay-White, Deputy Leader
presented the Leader’s Statement contained as Paper No:
COU/SE/18/001.
In addition to the written statement,
Councillor Mildmay-White drew attention to the following:
(a) Former Councillor
Bob Cockle and St Olaves Ward
That in times of conflicting demands, St
Edmundsbury Borough Council had always risen to the challenge and
she was sure that former Councillor Cockle, who had recently
resigned from the Council and to whom she gave her personal thanks,
would agree that St Edmundsbury had much to be proud of,
particularly in helping to bring communities together.
For example, in St Olaves, which was former
Councillor Cockle’s ward, it had been announced that the
community had been successful in securing £670,000 from the
One Public Estate and Land Release Fund Programme. The Land Release Fund was targeted at unlocking
housing units on council-owned sites, through a contribution to
remediation and infrastructure costs. This grant was specifically
for the St Olaves Road scheme to provide 79 units and replace the
Newbury Community Centre. In their
response, the Government had praised the community involvement and
ambition of the joint project between the Newbury Community
Association, St Edmundsbury Borough and Suffolk County Councils,
with local support in the early stages from Havebury Housing
Partnership.
(b) West Suffolk Growth
Investment Strategy
That the development of the West Suffolk
Growth Investment Strategy was to help the Council meet financial
challenges, protect services and invest in communities. Investing
and managing growth would not only provide income but also social
and economic benefits for West Suffolk’s communities and
businesses. Recent statistics in the press indicated that St
Edmundsbury was thriving across the board (see further details in
(d) below) with 659 new businesses formed in St Edmundsbury almost
a quarter of those were in Haverhill.
(c) Gender Pay
Gap
That a report would shortly be presented to
Cabinet, which would present that there was no gender pay gap
within the West Suffolk organisation.
Whilst commended at the last meeting of Council for her work,
special thanks were again given to Karen Points, Assistant Director
(HR, Legal and Democratic Services) who was shortly leaving the
organisation to take up the post of Strategic Director for
Abbeycroft Lesiure.
(d) West Suffolk
Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Recognition was given to West Suffolk
Hospital’s NHS Foundation Trust recent rating of
‘Outstanding’ by the Care
Quality Commission. This was a fantastic achievement which again,
was an excellent indicator of the many successes of St Edmundsbury.
The Borough had featured in a new survey linking literacy levels to
life expectancy. Great Barton was rated
top in Suffolk for life expectancy for men and ranked second for
women.
The following questions were asked:
(a) Councillor David Nettleton asked
a question in connection with future warding proposals for West
Suffolk as part of the process for creating the new single council,
in respect of why 500 homes that had been earmarked to be retained
in the parish of ...
view the full minutes text for item 323.
|
324. |
Public Participation
(Council Procedure Rules Section
6) Members of the public who live or work in the Borough are
invited to put one question of not more than five minutes duration.
A person who wishes to speak must register at least
fifteen minutes before the time the meeting is scheduled to
start.*
(Note: The maximum
time to be set aside for this item is 30 minutes, but if all
questions are dealt with sooner, or if there are no questions, the
Council will proceed to the next business.
Each person may ask
one question only. A total of five
minutes will be allowed for the question to be put and
answered. One further question will be allowed arising directly
from the reply, provided that the original time limit
of five minutes is not exceeded.
Written
questions may be submitted by members of the
public to the Service Manager (Democratic Services) no
later than 10.00 am on Monday 19 February 2018.. The written
notification should detail the full question to be
asked at the meeting of the Council.)*
*For further
information, see Public Information Sheet attached to this
agenda.
Minutes:
The following questions were put and answered
during this first session of Public Question Time.
1.
Peter Langdon, Vice-Chairman of Rushbrooke with Rougham
Parish Councilasked a question in connection with the Local
Government Boundary Commission for England ‘s (LGBCE)
forthcoming review of ward boundaries, which was a requirement of
creating the new council for West Suffolk, and whether this would
be subject to a consultation process that would enable parish
councils with the opportunity to respond. Mr Langdon expressed
concern on the proposals that may be put forward by the Council to
the LGBCE and how these might affect the parish of Rushbrooke with Rougham.
In response, Councillor Sara Mildmay-White,
Deputy Leader of the Council, explained that the external parish
boundaries would not be amended as part of this review (which was
last undertaken in 2015/2016) and the Council would not consider
making proposals around future warding without consulting with
parishes. The Future Governance
Steering Group would be exploring potential ward options, which
would be subject to consultation, then these would be put forward
to both Forest Heath District and St Edmundsbury Borough Councils to
consider. The LGBCE would determine the
new West Suffolk warding pattern and their work would be informed
by the Councils’ proposals and the proposals of other
interested parties.
No supplementary question was asked.
2. Ian
Steel, Chairman of Rushbrooke with
Rougham Parish Council, followed with a
question along similar lines to Mr Langdon, as outlined
above. He wished to express his view
that Rushbrooke with Rougham parish was a rural ward which should be
represented by one councillor that had knowledge of, and could
identify with, issues facing residents within rural
areas. He would not support a
two-member ward comprising councillors that may have an affiliation
towards a mix of rural and urban issues as he considered this would
not benefit the parish of Rushbrooke
with Rougham.
In response, Councillor Sara Mildmay-White,
Deputy Leader of the Council, reiterated her response to Mr Langdon
above and explained that as present Ward Member for Rougham ward, which covered Rushbrooke with Rougham
parish and other parishes, other villages she represented may
prefer a two-member ward. To this end,
parish councils (and individuals) were encouraged to respond to the
forthcoming consultation to be undertaken by the Council (as
outlined above) to establish a consensus of opinion.
No supplementary question was asked; however
Mr Steel placed further emphasis on his position outlined
above.
|
325. |
Referrals report of recommendations from Cabinet PDF 255 KB
Report No: COU/SE/18/002
(A) Referrals from
Cabinet: 9 January 2018
|
1.
|
(There are no referrals emanating from the Extraordinary Cabinet
meeting held on 9 January 2018 .)
|
|
|
(B) Referrals from
Cabinet: 6 February 2018
|
1.
|
Treasury Management Report
2017/2018 and Investment Activity (April to December
2017)
|
|
Portfolio
Holder: Cllr Ian Houlder
|
2.
|
Treasury Management Policy
Statement and Investment Strategy 2018/2019 and Code of
Practice
|
|
Portfolio
Holder: Cllr Ian Houlder
|
3.
|
Budget and Council Tax Setting:
2018/2019 and Medium Term Financial Strategy 2018-2022
|
|
Portfolio
Holder: Cllr Ian Houlder
This
item will be considered separately as part of Agenda Item 9
below.
|
4.
|
Overarching West
Suffolk Growth Investment Strategy, Governance and
Delegation
|
|
Portfolio
Holder: Cllr Alaric Pugh
|
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Council considered the Referrals Report of
Recommendations from Cabinet contained within Report No:
COU/SE/18/002.
(A) Referrals from Extraordinary Cabinet:
9 January 2018
Council noted there were no referrals
emanating from the extraordinary meeting of Cabinet held on 9
January 2018.
(B) Referrals from Cabinet: 6 February
2018
1. Treasury Management
Report 2017/2018 and Investment Activity (April to December
2017)
Approval was sought for the Treasury
Management Report 2017/2018 for the third quarter.
Councillor Ian Houlder, Portfolio Holder for
Resources and Performance, drew relevant issues to the attention of
Council.
On the motion of Councillor Ian Houlder,
seconded by Councillor John Burns, and duly carried, it was
RESOLVED:
That the Treasury Management Report 2017/2018
for the period 1 April 2017 to 31 December 2017, attached at
Appendix 1 to Report No: TMS/SE/18/001, be approved.
2. Treasury Management
Policy Statement and Investment Strategy 2018/2019 and Code of
Practice
Approval was sought for the Treasury
Management Policy Statement and Investment Strategy
2018/2019 and Code of Practice.
Councillor Ian Houlder,
Portfolio Holder for Resources and Performance, drew relevant
issues to the attention of Council, including highlighting the main
changes to the proposed Strategy and the Code of Practice, as
summarised in paragraph 2.3 of the referrals report.
On the motion of Councillor Ian Houlder,
seconded by Councillor Sarah Broughton, and duly carried, it
was
RESOLVED:
(1) the Updated
(December 2017) Treasury Management in the Public Services Code of
Practice and Cross-Sectional Guidance Notes, be adopted;
(2) the Treasury
Management Policy Statement and Investment Strategy 2018-2019, as
set out in Appendix 1 to Report No: TMS/SE/18/002, be approved;
and
(3) the Treasury Management Code of
Practice 2018-2019, as set out in Appendix 2 to Report No:
TMS/SE/18/002, be approved.
3. Budget and Council
Tax Setting: 208/2019 and Medium Term Financial Strategy
2018-2022
Members noted that the recommendations
emanating from this report would be considered separately under
Agenda Item 9 (see minute 327 below.)
4. Overarching West
Suffolk Growth Investment Strategy, Governance and Delegation
Approval was sought for a new
Overarching West Suffolk Growth Investment Strategy, together with
associated governance arrangements and delegation
proposals.
Having approved a set of
principles by which to develop the Overarching Growth Investment
Strategy, this had now been produced and was attached to the
Cabinet report (and for ease of reference to the Council report),
together with an Executive Summary as Attachment A. The Strategy
aimed to support the vision and objectives in the recently adopted
West Suffolk Strategic Framework 2018-2020 and set out how the West
Suffolk Councils (FHDC and SEBC) would invest to achieve these
strategic priorities contained in the Framework.
Councillor Alaric Pugh,
Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth, drew relevant issues to
the attention of Council, including that the Strategy (which was
subject to minor typographical and grammatical errors, which would
be amended under existing delegated authority) included
opportunities in four key areas (housing, business, infrastructure
and inclusive growth) for investment in Growth across West Suffolk;
not all of which the Councils had a role or ...
view the full minutes text for item 325.
|
326. |
Single Council for West Suffolk: Legislative Process PDF 218 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Council considered Report No: COU/SE/18/003,
which sought endorsement for the policy requirements and next steps
for progressing the legislative process towards creating a single
council for West Suffolk.
The draft Orders, which were unable to be
published in the public domain at the present time for the reasons
given in paragraph 2.3 of the report, would be laid before
Parliament following approval sought by both Cabinets on 27
February 2018 (as this was an executive decision.)
In summary, the first Order allowed for the
Secretary of State to act upon a proposal for boundary change made
by a local authority without the requirement of a review or
recommendation from the Local Government Boundary Commission
(LGBCE). The second Orderdetailed the structural changes required
to create the new council and abolished Forest Heath District and
St Edmundsbury Borough Councils. It
also made provision for ‘stop gap’ electoral warding
(see below), which would be amended following full review of the
LGBCE.
An addendum to Report No: COU/SE/18/003 had
previously been circulated following the distribution of the
summons and papers for this meeting, which provided a proposal
formed by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
(MHCLG) on a warding pattern that was based on the 14 existing
county divisions but was broken down, within each division, using
the existing Forest Heath and St Edmundsbury wards as building blocks. This did not
represent the Council’s view on what the wards should be and
was the stop-gap position; however, this was unavoidable in
procedural terms and to comply with the legislative process.
Councillor Carol Bull, Portfolio Holder for
Future Governance, drew relevant issues to the attention of
Council, including the policy requirements summarised in Section 4
of the report, namely the requirements
the Secretary of State would place to ensure the process was robust
and transparent, which included the establishment of the Shadow
Authority until the new council came into being on 1 April
2019.
Members were fully supportive of the policy
requirements and the proposed next steps summarised in Section 6 of
the report.
On the motion of Councillor Carol Bull,
seconded by Councillor David Nettleton, and duly carried, it
was
RESOLVED:
The policy requirements and
next steps as set out in Report No: COU/SE/18/003 to create a
single Council for West Suffolk be endorsed; and Cabinet be
recommended to delegate the Chief Executive, in consultation with
the Leaders of the Councils and the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of
the Future Governance Steering Group to authorise the relevant
Orders on the condition that they remain in line with the policy
requirements within Report No: COU/SE/18/003.
(Note: Due to
circumstances connected with the legislative process, a revised
recommendation was subsequently considered and approved by the
Forest Heath District Council’s and St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s Cabinets on 27
February 2018. See minutes of those
meetings for details.)
(Councillor Clive
Springett left the meeting during the consideration of this
item.)
|
327. |
Budget and Council Tax Setting: 2018/2019 and Medium Term Financial Strategy 2018-2022 PDF 331 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Council considered Report No: COU/SE/18/004,
which presented the proposals for Budget and Council
Tax Setting in 2018/2019 and the Medium Term Financial Strategy
2018-2022.
Councillor Ian Houlder,
Portfolio Holder for Resources and Performance drew relevant issues
to the attention of Council, including that Report No:
COU/SE/18/004 provided details of the Council’s proposed
revenue and capital budgets for 2018/2019 and in the medium
term.
In light of the significant
transformation in the funding of local services, the Council
continued to face considerable financial challenges in the short,
medium and longer term. Changes
included reductions in Government grant funding, including the
removal of the Revenue Support Grant; more business rates being
retained locally (and the uncertainty around how that was going to
work); plus the introduction, and then reduction of New Homes
Bonus. Further details and the
implications of these particular matters were detailed in the
report.
Alongside these reductions, was
the lowest bank base rate for years therefore the Council’s
income from interest was significantly reduced, together with the
Council experiencing an increased demand in some services, such as
support and advice relating to housing options and
homelessness. Council tax increases had
been capped at 3% (previously 2%) but this local tax raised only
one fifth of the Council’s income for local
services. National policy encouraged
councils to grow their local, and therefore UK, economy by
supporting business, investment and housing to bring in
income. Bridging the gap between income
and demand was the single biggest challenge facing local government
across the country.
St Edmundsbury Borough Council had been working in
partnership with Forest Heath District Council (the West Suffolk
councils) since 2010 and had saved in excess of £4 million
annually through sharing services. The Councils were continuing
this savings and transformation theme through the creation of a new
single Council from April 2019, with a further £800,000 of
savings and efficiencies planned.
The West Suffolk Councils had
recognised and taken a proactive investment role, not only to meet the challenges brought by
funding for councils, but also importantly to manage growth and
ensure prosperity for the local communities. It was therefore imperative that the income
received now was maintained and that the strategic investment
projects were delivered, particularly as moving into 2018/2019,
further reliance was held upon their delivery to secure sustainable
budgets in the medium and longer term. Section 1.1.5 and 1.1.6
provided further detail on this within the context of meeting the
priorities of the West Suffolk Strategic Framework and the new
Overarching West Suffolk Growth Investment Strategy (as adopted by
Council, see minute 327 above.)
Section 1.2 of the report
provided details of the Council’s total formula grant for
2018/2019 (which included Revenue Support Grant (RSG) and Baseline
Funding from retained business rates - before growth) which was
£2.689m. The reduction in RSG to
zero in 2019/2020 had been confirmed.
This section also provided an explanation of the Business Rates
Retention scheme, including
the offer for the Borough Council to participate in
the Suffolk Business Rates ...
view the full minutes text for item 327.
|
328. |
Review of Political Balance and Appointment to Politically Balanced Bodies PDF 250 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Council considered Report No: COU/SE/18/005,
which presented a review of the political balance and proposed
appointments to the politically balanced bodies.
Following the recent
resignation of Councillor Bob Cockle, a by-election for the vacancy
on St Edmundsbury Borough Council
(SEBC) (St Olaves Ward (Bury St
Edmunds)) was due to take place in due course.
In addition, the Borough
Council’s UKIP political group had recently dissolved, which
as a consequence, had resulted in five non-grouped Members now
sitting on the Council, details of which were contained in Section
1.1.2 of the report.
Accordingly, this had altered
the political composition of the Borough Council and Council was,
therefore, requested to review the allocation of seats and
substitutes to political groups in accordance with the political
balance rules, as ‘far as reasonably
practicable’.
In the absence of the Leader of
the Council, Councillor Carol Bull, Portfolio Holder for Future
Governance, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council,
including that Appendix 1 provided details of the committees
required to be politically balanced and their respective place
entitlement and proposed seat allocations. Proposals for the allocation of seats to
non-grouped Members were also set out in this Appendix, as
provisionally agreed by Group Leaders.
Appendix 2 showed the
entitlement and proposed allocation of substitutes on the
politically balanced committees. It was
suggested that the Council continued its precedence of ensuring
that each Group had a substitute if they were represented on a
committee, and, once this was achieved, if there were additional
substitute places on a committee, they were distributed by
political balance, as indicated.
Council agreed this was a
sensible approach.
Largely as a result of the
resignation of Councillor Bob Cockle, the Charter Group currently
had one additional seat across the Council than its present
entitlement. Council considered that
this may however, be for the short term pending the result of the
by-election, and that it was prudent not to make any changes to
this Group’s seat allocation at the present time.
On the motion of Councillor
Carol Bull, seconded by Councillor John Burns, and duly carried, it
was
RESOLVED:
That:
(1)
the formula for the allocation of seats to the
political groups on those Committees which are required by law to
be politically balanced, as set out in paragraph 1.2.1, be
approved;
(2) the allocation
of seats (and seats for substitute Members) on the Committees which
are required by law to be politically balanced, as indicated in
Appendices 1 and 2 to Report No:
COU/SE/18/005, be approved;
(3) the allocation
of full member and substitute seats on the West Suffolk Joint
Standards Committee, as indicated in Section
1.3.5, be approved.
This Committee is not required to be politically
balanced;
(4) whilst the
Democratic Renewal Working Party is not required to be politically
balanced, the allocation of seats is by
custom and practice, undertaken on this basis. Therefore, the allocation of full
member and substitute seats to this Working Party, as indicated in
Section 1.3.6, be approved;
and ...
view the full minutes text for item 328.
|
329. |
Brownfield Land Register: Constitutional Amendments PDF 210 KB
Minutes:
Council considered Report No: COU/SE/18/006,
which sought approval for necessary amendments to the
officers’ Scheme of Delegation contained in the Constitution in order to assign responsibility for
brownfield land register management.
Recent regulations (The Town
and Country Planning (Brownfield Register) Regulations 2017)
required local authorities to set up and manage registers of
brownfield sites within their areas, which may ultimately be
suitable for residential development.
An explanation of how the register was to be managed was detailed
in the report, including that it was to be divided into two parts,
namely:
First
Part: List of brownfield sites that may
be suitable for development, subject to criteria outlined in the
report.
Second
Part: Brownfield sites that may wish to
be allocated for residential development, which according to the
regulations, meant by virtue of the inclusion, the site had
‘permission in principle’ to develop housing on it. As
‘permission in principle’ was not clearly defined in
the regulations, there was a judgement as to whether or not land
should be included in this part of the register and be given
permission in principle.
Given this, it was proposed
that “management of the brownfield land register under The
Town and Country Planning (Brownfield Land Register) 2017”
should be added to the responsibilities of the Assistant Director
(Planning and Regulatory Services). This would mean that the
officers had responsibility for general management of the register,
but, in the event that a Ward Member or Parish Council raised
concern regarding the proposal to include a site in the second part
of the register, it would be referred to the Delegation Panel to
consider and potentially to the Development Control Committee to
determine.
On the motion of Councillor
Carol Bull, seconded by Councillor Peter Stevens, and duly carried,
it was
RESOLVED:
That the amendment to the
Scheme of Delegation, as set out in paragraph 1.5 of Report No:
COU/SE/18/006, be agreed, and authority be given to the Monitoring
Officer to make the necessary Constitutional amendments.
|
330. |
Calendar of Meetings: 2018/2019 PDF 198 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Council considered Report No: COU/SE/18/007,
which sought approval for the proposed calendar of meetings for
2018/2019.
Councillor Carol Bull,
Portfolio Holder for Future Governance, drew relevant issues to the
attention of Council, including that other meetings not listed in
the Council’s Constitution and those arranged on an ad-hoc
basis would be scheduled throughout 2018/2019 and Members would be
advised of these separately.
In addition, Members noted that
in light of the significant journey towards the creation of a
single council for West Suffolk, which was currently timetabled to
become effective from 1 April 2019, and the extensive number of
projects currently in progress, elements of which required Member
approval, the Calendar of Meetings for 2018/2019 contained a higher
quantity of meetings than a usual municipal year.
The main changes were set out
in Section 2.2 of the report and it was additionally noted that
rather than calling extraordinary meetings at relatively short
notice, some meetings may be cancelled where insufficient business
warranted the convening of a meeting.
On the motion of Councillor
Carol Bull, seconded by Councillor Clive Pollington, and duly
carried it was
RESOLVED:
That the Calendar of Meetings
for 2018/2019, attached as Appendix A to Report No: COU/SE/18/007,
be approved.
|
331. |
Questions to Committee Chairmen
Members are invited to ask questions of
committee Chairmen on business transacted by their committees since
the last ordinary meeting of Council on 19 December 2017.
Committee
|
Chairman
|
Dates
of meetings
|
Overview and Scrutiny
Committee
|
Cllr Diane Hind
|
10 January 2018
7 February 2018
(scrutiny workshop)
|
Performance and Audit Scrutiny
Committee
|
Cllr Sarah Broughton
|
31 January 2018
|
Development Control
Committee
|
Cllr Jim Thorndyke
|
1 February 2018
|
|
Minutes:
Council considered a narrative item, which
sought questions of Committee Chairmen on business transacted by
their committees since the last ordinary meeting of Council on 19
December 2017, as outlined below:
Committee
|
Chairman
|
Dates
of meetings
|
Overview and Scrutiny
Committee
|
Cllr Diane Hind
|
10 January 2018
7 February 2018
(scrutiny workshop)
|
Performance and Audit Scrutiny
Committee
|
Cllr Sarah Broughton
|
31 January 2018
|
Development Control
Committee
|
Cllr Jim Thorndyke
|
1 February 2018
|
No questions were asked of the above
Chairmen.
|
332. |
Urgent Questions on Notice
The Council will consider any urgent questions
on notice that were notified to the Service Manager (Democratic
Services) by 11am on the day of the meeting.
Minutes:
No urgent questions on notice had been
received.
|
|
In this section
|