Agenda and minutes

The public open forum will commence at 2.00 p.m. and the following formal business of the Council will commence at 2.30 p.m. or whenever the public open forum ends, if earlier.

Prior notice in accordancewith council procedure 10.3 had been given of the following questions put by a member of the public:-

Question: Mrs Mary Patrick, 119 Essex Road, Stamford

Could it be announced to the public at the beginning of the public open forum that minutes are produced in handwriting and mechanically recorded.

Response: Councillor Mrs Linda Neal, Leader of the Council

Thank you for the question Mrs Patrick, I have spoken to Mrs Patrickabout the question beforehand and the question relates to the notices on the door as we come into the Council Chamber.  People who are dyslexic or have other reading difficulties cannot always appreciate these and could it be made clear that there are written notes and recordings, though the latter is not available to the public. On behalf of the Chairman I amhappy to take on board that these are available and that this is announced at each meeting.    

Question: Mrs Mary Patrick, 119 Essex Road, Stamford

Could you please tell me why your planning officers and the enforcement officers are not keeping a close eye on the building in Chapel Yard, Stamford.

Response: Councillor John Smith, Portfolio Holder, Economic

I wish to thank Mrs Patrick for her question, but it is NOT true to say that our officers are not keeping an eye on the building at Chapel Yard Stamford.

I am pleased to confirm that our officers have visited this site on numerous occasions and continue to do so.

It is important to remember that this development was granted on appeal and NOT by South Kesteven District Council.

Supplementary question by Mrs Patrick

Planning consent was granted for three storeys, but the premises is being built at four storeys without permission. There is a tree preservation order on the trees but branches are being cut back. The trees have been there since 1920, the applicant is flouting the planning laws.

Response: Councillor John Smith

The Developers have started to convert the roof space, including the provision of dormer windows, this does not constitute the installation of a separate floor or alter the height of the building. The trees are covered by a tree preservation order and any major work would require planning consent, to the best of my knowledge no such work has occurred.    

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Bisnauthsing, Bryant, Burrows, Chivers, Dexter, Mrs Dexter, Mrs Kaberry-Brown, Morris, Nadarajah,  Parkin, Wheat and Mrs Woods.  

The Chairman informed the meeting that Councillor Neil Dexter was gravely ill in hospital. Councillor Fred Burrows was no longer in hospital but was still  unwell and also that his son had died recently.

It was agreed that letters be sent to both members; to Councillor Mrs Dexter to express the support of the Council and to offer help, and to Councillor Burrows expressing condolences and wishing him an improvement in his health.

Members are asked to declare any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting.

There were none declared.

The Chief Executive to report.

The Chief Executive reported that at the Truesdale Ward by-election on 5^th May 2005 Mr Andrew Moore had been elected to represent Truesdale Ward. The Chairman welcomed Councillor Moore to his first meeting of the Council.

Councillor Moore thanked Members and officers for the warm welcome he had received from Members and Officers since his election.

The minutes of the meeting held on 28^th April 2005 were confirmed as a correct record, subject to the following:-

Page 2 Minute 1 – election of Chairman: Councillor Wilks had seconded Vic Kerr as Chairman of the Council not Councillor Avril Williams

Add Councillors Gerald Taylor and Conboy to the list of those present.

The following announcements were made:-

The Chairman advised that the civic photograph was now available for purchase.

He also advised that his charity for the forthcoming year would be LIVES

By Councillor Stephen O’Hare:

“That this Council RESOLVES

1. That there should be with immediate effect no charge to any resident for dealing with an infestation of rats in their house (residence) or garden within the area of SKDC

AND

2. That the budget and policy framework be adjusted to establish sufficient financial provision to enable this

AND

3. The portfolio-holder be urged to implement the wishes of this Council to have such a policy

AND

4. That the cost of this, in the current financial year ending 31^st March 2006 be a  charge on the financial reserves.”     

by Councillor Stephen O’Hare

DECISION:  Not to support the Motion proposed by Councillor O’Hare.

The following motion had been proposed by Councillor O’Hare:

“That this Council RESOLVES

1. That there should be with immediate effect no charge to any resident for dealing with an infestation of rats in their house (residence) or garden within the area of SKDC

AND

2. That the budget and policy framework be adjusted to establish sufficient financial provision to enable this

AND

3. The portfolio-holder be urged to implement the wishes of this Council to have such a policy

AND

4. That the cost of this, in the current financial year ending 31^st March 2006 be a charge on the financial reserves.”     

In moving the above motion Councillor O’Hare stated that this was a problem that was much worse in rural areas and he produced figures which contended that the cost of this would be 3p per fortnight per household.

Councillor Michael Taylor stated that this was a discretionary service which the Council did not have to provide at all.

In seconding the motion Councillor Mrs Jalili advised that most Councils did not charge tenants for this service.

Councillor Mike Williams supported the motion and reminded the meeting that rat urine led to Wiel’s disease which could prove fatal.

Councillor Auger as portfolio holder outlined the process that had led to the present Council policy. The 2005/6 budget had been considered by Environment and Capacity and Resources DSPs and then agreed by Full Council. Councillor O’Hare had tried to call this in but the call-in request had not been valid.

Councillors Wood, Fereshteh Hurst, Wilks and John Hurst  all spoke in favour of the motion.

Councillor Fisher reminded the meeting that if the motion was implemented there would be an increase in Council expenditure. Councillor Craft observed that that there were an abnormally large number of rats this year and that the proposal ought perhaps to be considered for one year only. Councillor Thompson agreed that there were a larger number of rats in rural areas this year, stubble burning used to kill off lots of rats but this was no longer allowed.

Refuse bags tended to attract more vermin. However Councillor Thompson did not believe that the service should be free of charge. He moved as an amendment to the motion that there should be a charge of £10 for this service, this was seconded by Councillor Craft.

Councillor Carpenter observed that cleanliness was the answer, his premises were thoroughly cleaned and baited and he did not have a rat problem. People should be more proactive.

Councillor Hewerdine asked if the Council provided any explanatory leaflets and advice. Mike Brown, Environmental Health Manager, confirmed that this was the case.

In summing up, Councillor O’Hare reminded the meeting that this motion only referred to rats, not wasps, mice etc.               

The Chief Executive advised that this motion was successful it was not capable of being implemented.  This was an executive matter that had been delegated by the Cabinet  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

Report number DRS16 by the Director of Regulatory Services.   (Enclosure)

DECISION

To identify large scale voluntary transfer as the preferred option of the Council for the future ownership and management of the housing stock, following the recommendation made by the Stock Option Appraisal Commission (SOAC) who have undertaken the detailed appraisal of the options on behalf of the Council for the following reasons:-

a To provide the opportunity to secure investment for tenant priorities

b  To provide an opportunity to invest in improving tenant services

c  To provide opportunities for enhanced tenants involvement

d  To provide the opportunity for investment in affordable housing

e To provide the ability for the council to focus on its strategic                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            housing function.

The Chairman welcomed Miss Gillian Tressider, Chairman, and other members of the Stock Option Appraisal Commission (SOAC) to the meeting. The Chairman, on behalf of the Council, presented Miss Tressider with a floral basket as a token of the Council’s appreciation for her considerable input into the process.  Miss Tressider gave a presentation which detailed the work of the SOAC and its links to the Tenant Options Appraisal Group (TOAG). She explained why it was the SOAC’s view that the tenants should be balloted on the transfer option.

The Chairman, on behalf of the Council, thanked Miss Tressider for her presentation. Thanks were also recorded to Sally Marshall, Corporate Director of Regulatory Services, and her team of officers.

The Chairman reminded Full Council that all Members had been invited to a joint meeting of Community and Capacity and Resources DSPs on 8^th April 2005. The work of the SOAC had been scrutinised in great detail and the meeting could not find any flaw in the process nor any reason to conclude that the evidence suggested that a different conclusion could have been reached. This was not the time to delve into the process in great depth.

The merits or otherwise of stock transfer were debated, some Members expressing a preference for an Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO). It was emphasised that any decision to transfer the Council’s housing stock would have to be made by the tenants themselves in a ballot. The Council was not debating stock transfer but to allow the process towards a decision to move forward.

The motion was duly moved and seconded.  A request for a recorded vote was made and supported in accordance with Council procedure rule 16.4. The names of members voting either for or against the motion or abstaining are recorded below:-

Cabinet to provide recommendations following consideration of this matter on 23^rd May 2005.                                                               (To Follow)

DECISION

That the Council receives a recommendation from Cabinet in relation to the resourcing of the housing improvement programme and  endorses the following:-

To accept the findings and recommendations of the strategic housing inspection produced by the Audit Commission;

The use or provision of up to £50,000 for asupplementary estimate for internal secondments and external support to provide additional capacity for the strategic housing improvement programme, to be financed from the capacity and resources reserve within the general fund;

The use or provision of up to£100,000 for a supplementary estimate for one off costs to deliver the restructure, to be financed from general reserves within the general fund as required;

To confirm the appointment of the Housing Portfolio Holder or nominated representative to the appointments panel for the posts of Tenancy Support Manager, Repairs and Improvements Manager and Housing and Sustainable Homes Manager;

To confirm the appointment of the Housing Portfolio Holder, the Chairman of the Council, the Chairman of the Community DSPand the Chairman of the main opposition group (or any nomination of those persons) to the appointments panel for the Director of Tenancy Services.

The Corporate Director of Regulatory Services presented a report which outlined the recommendations of Cabinet to Council on this matter following detailed scrutiny by an emergency meeting of the Community DSP on 12^th May 2005. The council had appeared to be on course for a one star rating of this service but it appeared that the bar had been raised by the Audit Commission since the last inspection.

Members expressed concern at the content of the report which was acknowledged to be very critical and damning of the service in question. Some Members, whilst expressing every confidence in the staff, called for the resignation of the Portfolio Holder in consequence but the Portfolio Holder, Councillor Martin-Mayhew, stated that he would not resign as he was determined to see the task through to completion. The Leader responded to concerns raised that if there was no improvement in 12 months time then she would remove Councillor Martin-Mayhew from the portfolio holder post. The target was to achieve a 2 star rating with certain prospects for improvement. A district council in Worcestershire which had scored an excellent rating with excellent prospects for improvement on strategic housing had been contacted and were prepared to work with the Council in working towards these aims.

The motion was moved, duly seconded and resolved. An amendment proposed by Councillor Selby to thank the Audit Commission was lost.       

The Cabinet to recommend that the Council formally adopts the above strategy.

[A copy of the Cabinet minute from 9^th May 2005 is attached.]

                                                                                                            (Enclosure)

The full Strategy document can be accessed electronically via the “Local Democracy” link on the Council’s website under the Cabinet agenda for 9^th May 2005.

DECISION:

That the council formally adopts this strategy

On consideration of report DCS21 by the Director of Community Services and the Cabinet recommendation on this report, the motion was duly moved and seconded. 

The Cabinet to recommend the approval of the Draft Best Value Performance Plan for 2005/06.

[Draft BVPP and Cabinet minute from 9^th May 2005 attached.]  (Enclosure)

DECISION

To formally endorse the Cabinet recommendation of 9^th May 2005 (Minute CO9) and approve the Council’s Best Value Performance Plan and Best Value Review Programme 2005/6.

On consideration of the Cabinet’s recommendations on this matter, the motion was duly proposed and seconded.

Report number CEX291 by the Chief Executive.        (Enclosure)

DECISION

That the Council approve the arrangements as set out in report CEX291 of the Chief Executive and that

1. The Members’ Forum be held on 23^rd June 2005 commencing at 9.30am; and

2. An Ordinary Council meeting, without a public forum, be held at 2.30pm on the same day

The Chief Executive advised members that, in the light of the number of issues currently facing the Council, the holding of an additional Council meeting was considered necessary. The motion was duly moved and seconded.

Six questions had been submitted prior to the meeting.

Verbatim details of the questions, together with supplementary questions and the responses are set out in the appendix to the minutes.

The meeting closed at 5.33p.m.