Agenda and minutes

The Chairman will take the chair, make the declaration of acceptance of office and be invested with the chain of office.

 

DECISION:  That Councillor Mrs Margery Radley be elected Chairman of the District Council until the next annual meeting of the Council.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Adams and seconded by Councillor Craft that Councillor Mrs Margery Radley be Chairman of the Council for the ensuing year. 

 

The Chairman was invested with the chains of office and signed the declaration of acceptance of office.  The Chairman gave a brief speech of thanks during which she undertook to promote the district of South Kesteven, an area she said she was proud to live in.

 

The Chairman then took the chair.

 

COUNCILLOR MRS MARGERY RADLEY IN THE CHAIR

 

 

After the vote of thanks, the Chairman will make a presentation to the retiring Chairman.  The retiring Chairman will then respond.

 

A vote of thanks was made to the retiring Chairman, Councillor Bob Adams, by Councillor Thompson who pointed out that Councillor Adams had been the twenty fifth Chairman of South Kesteven District Council.  Councillor Thompson referred to the pleasant and unobtrusive way that Councillor Adams had chaired the council meetings during which he had been even handed and fair to all sides.

 

Councillor Adams was presented with a retiring gift and responded to the vote of thanks during which he expressed his appreciation to his Chaplains, his Vice-Chairman, and officers for their support during his year of office.  He also thanked members for their co-operation and goodwill irrespective of party.

 

Group Leaders then congratulated Councillor Mrs Radley on her election as Chairman and expressed their good wishes for her term of office.

The Vice-Chairman will make the declaration of acceptance of office and be invested with the Vice-Chairman’s medallion.

 

DECISION: That Councillor Mike Cook be appointed Vice-Chairman of the Council until the next annual meeting of the Council.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Linda Neal and seconded by Councillor Martin-Mayhew that Councillor Mike Cook be Vice-Chairman of the District Council for the ensuing year. 

 

Councillor Cook made a declaration of acceptance of office and thanked the Council for electing him.

 

 

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Bisnauthsing, Helyar, Selby, Andrea Webster, Tom Webster, and Avril Williams.

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

 

There were no declarations of interest made at the meeting.

                                                                                                            (Enclosure)

 

The minutes of the ordinary meeting held on 1 March 2010 were confirmed as a correct record subject to the reply from Councillor Smith to Mrs Kara McDonald at minute 77 on page 2 being amended to read:

 

Our current budget is entirely used for the maintenance and repair of equipment to ensure that it is kept fully compliant with Health and Safety regulations.  This budget is under pressure with the unfortunate amount of vandalism in some areas.  However, I am pleased to say that it is intended to repaint the existing apparatus by engaging the services of the Unpaid Work Scheme, better known as the Probation Service, and also to repair any equipment which needs it.  Most importantly we will be fully repairing the damaged areas of safety surfacing.

                                                                                                            (Enclosure)

 

A list of engagements undertaken by the outgoing Chairman since the last council meeting was noted.  Members’ were advised that the civic dinner at West Lindsey District Council took place on 16 April this year and not 2009 as stated.  Similarly, the civic service at Rutland County Council was on 18 April 2010, and not 2009 as listed.

 

DECISION: That Councillor Mrs Linda Neal be appointed Leader of the District Council until the next Annual Meeting of the Council.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Farrar, and seconded by Councillor Lovelock, that Councillor Mrs Linda Neal be appointed Leader of the Council.  There were no other nominations.

 

Following the vote, a member expressed her concern that there was not to be a change of Leader although she pointed out that her comments were not a reflection on Councillor Mrs Neal personally.

 

 

DECISION:

 

(1)    To set the size of the Cabinet at six members, including the Leader;

(2)    To note the following membership of the Cabinet and their respective portfolio responsibilities:

 

 

PORTFOLIO                                                 MEMBER                 

 

Leader                                                           Councillor               

Strategic                                                       Mrs Linda Neal

Partnerships           

                                                                       

           

Deputy Leader                                            Councillor   

Corporate                                                     Paul Carpenter                   

Governance &                                            

Housing

 

Resources & Assets                                 Councillor

                                                                        Mike Taylor

 

Economic Development                           Councillor

                                                                        Mrs Frances Cartwright

 

Access & Engagement                             Councillor Ray Auger

 

Healthy Environment                                Councillor John Smith

 

Report number DEM040 by the Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder.

                                                                                                (Enclosure)

 

 

DECISION:

 

(1)  Noting and accepting the wish of the Labour Group to relinquish its allocated seat on the Development Control Committee, to approve the following arrangements for the allocation of committee seats to members based on political groups’ aggregate membership as a proportional share of Full Council seats:

 

Committee	Conservative	Independent	Liberal Dem’t	Labour	Total
Development Control	10	4	3		17
Licensing	7	3	1		11
Resources PDG	4	2	1		7
Community PDG	4	2	1		7
Engagement PDG	4	2		1	7
Scrutiny Committee	7	3	1		11
Constitution Cttee	3	1	1		5
Governance & Audit Committee	3	1	1		5
Standards	No political balance required				4

 

 

(2)                                     To endorse the names of the members of the Standards Committee as submitted by the Leaders of the Conservative group and the Independent group:

 

Councillor Lovelock, Councillor Adams, Councillor Moore, and Councillor Mike Williams

 

(3)                                     To approve the following committee memberships:

 

Development Control Committee:

 

Councillor Adams

Councillor Cook

Councillor Exton

Councillor Mrs Gaffigan

Councillor Helyar

Councillor Higgs

Councillor Holmes

Councillor Howard

Councillor Mrs Jalili

Councillor Sam Jalili

Councillor Mrs Kaberry-Brown

Councillor Vic Kerr

 

Councillor Parkin

Councillor Scott

Councillor Judy Smith

Councillor Turner

Councillor Avril Williams

 

Licensing Committee

 

Councillor Mrs Bosworth

Councillor Brough

Councillor Broughton

Councillor Chivers

Councillor Exton

Councillor Howard

Councillor Mrs Radley

Councillor Russell

Councillor Turner

Councillor Wheat

Councillor Mike Williams

 

Scrutiny Committee

 

Councillor Mrs Bosworth

Councillor Hearmon

Councillor Helyar

Councillor Higgs

Councillor Holmes

Councillor Joynson

Councillor Mrs Kaberry-Brown

Councillor Newcombe-Jones

Councillor Mrs Judy Smith

Councillor Andrea Webster

Councillor Mike Williams

 

Resources Policy Development Group

 

Councillor Craft

Councillor Cook

Councillor Mrs Jalili

Councillor Bob Sandall

Councillor Susan Sandall

Councillor Scott

Councillor Stokes

 

 

Engagement Policy Development Group

 

Councillor Exton

Councillor Cook

Councillor Jock Kerr

Councillor McBride

Councillor Russell

Councillor Selby

Councillor Tom Webster

 

Communities Policy Development Group

 

Councillor Bisnauthsing

Councillor Miss Channell

Councillor Nicholson

Councillor Martin-Mayhew

Councillor Stephens

Councillor Thompson

Councillor Wootten

 

Constitution Committee

 

Councillor Joyce Gaffigan

Councillor Martin-Mayhew

Councillor Susan Sandall

Councillor Andrea Webster

Councillor Wootten

 

Governance and Audit Committee

 

Councillor Dawson

Councillor Farrar

Councillor Joynson

Councillor Lovelock

Councillor Moore

 

In presenting report number DEM040 the Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder referred to the amended papers showing political composition and existing committee membership which had been circulated to members.  He moved that the council accepts the political composition and the allocation of seats as indicated on the amended papers.  The motion was seconded.

 

The Leader of the Liberal Democrat group expressed her concern that although the Standards Committee was not required to be politically balanced, two groups on the council were effectively excluded from it.  She considered that this was unfair and proposed an amendment that each group on the council should be represented on the Standards Committee.  The amendment received a seconder.  After several members spoke in support of the amendment a vote was taken but subsequently lost.

 

The debate moved back to the original motion during which the Conservative Unaligned member drew the council’s attention to the paper on political composition which referred to his position  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

 

DECISION: To award the positions of Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of committees and groups to the following members:

 

Development Control Committee:

CouncillorParkin – Chairman

Councillor Adams – Vice-Chairman

 

Licensing Committee:

CouncillorMrs Bosworth – Chairman

Councillor Turner – Vice-Chairman

 

Scrutiny Committee:

CouncillorJoynson – Chairman

CouncillorMrs Judy Smith – Vice-Chairman

 

Resources Policy Development Group:

Councillor Craft – Chairman

Councillor Scott – Vice-Chairman

 

Communities Policy Development Group:

Councillor Nicholson – Chairman

Councillor Thompson – Vice-Chairman

 

Engagement Policy Development Group:

Councillor Exton – Chairman

Councillor Tom Webster – Vice-Chairman

 

Constitution Committee:

Councillor Martin-Mayhew – Chairman

Councillor Andrea Webster – Vice-Chairman

 

Governance & Audit Committee:

Councillor Lovelock – Chairman

Councillor Farrar – Vice-Chairman

 

In accordance with Council procedure rule 1.1 (viii), the Leader proposed that there be no changes in chairmanships or vice-chairmanships from the previous year for appointments to the committees and Policy Development Groups.  The proposals were seconded, and following a vote, carried.

 

To approve a programme or of ordinary meetings of the Council and its Committees for the municipal year.

Report number DEM041 by the Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder.

                                                                                                (Enclosure)

 

DECISION: In accordance with Council procedure rule 1.1 (x) that the meetings of the Council and Committees be held in accordance with the draft programme of meetings at appendix 2 to report DEM041 showing the Development Control Committee meeting on a four weekly cycle, and subject to the deletion of the council meeting on 14 April 2011, to be replaced by the annual meeting of the council on 19 May 2011 following the District and Parish elections.

 

The Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder presented report number DEM041 which contained two versions of a draft programme of meetings for the ensuing municipal year; one as presented to the council in January 2010 for information, and the second version showing the Development Control Committee meeting on a four weekly cycle instead of the present three week cycle.  The Portfolio Holder moved that the council accepts the second version of the timetable and this was seconded.

 

The Chairman of the Development Control Committee, Councillor Parkin,  explained the reasons why the committee was recommending a move to a four week cycle.  It would allow case officers more time to prepare reports without affecting the operation of the service.

 

Councillor Parkin also highlighted the date of the annual meeting on the draft programme which was shown as 14 April 2011.  Given that 2011 was the year of ordinary elections for the district, it was pointed out that this should be moved to May to comply with statutory requirements.  The Portfolio Holder agreed to this amendment to his motion that the annual meeting of the council be held on 19 May 2011 and the date of 14 April be deleted from the draft programme.  A vote on moving the date of the annual meeting to 19 May 2011 was taken and carried.

 

A member asked why council meetings were always held on a Thursday and asked if there was no constitutional reason, consideration be given to some meetings being held on other days of the week to allow some members the opportunity to attend.

 

A further vote was taken on the motion to approve the draft programme of meetings as shown at appendix 2 with the Development Control Committee meeting on a four weekly basis.  This was also carried.

The Chairman of the Standards Committee to submit report number LEG065

                                                                                                (Enclosure)

 

DECISION: To note the note the report of the Standards Committee for the period May 2009 to April 2010.

 

In presenting his report to the council, Mr Chris Holtom, independent Chairman of the Standards Committee, made mention of earlier comments in the meeting about non partisanship.  He said the Standards Committee’s work was entirely without party politics.  He saw the role of the committee as prevention and suggested that the standards regime seemed to be working as there had been fewer complaints lodged than last year.  The focus was on raising the status of members in the public’s perception; unfairly the public’s poor perception of MP’s extended to local Councillors who were in fact subject to a much tighter framework that was more controlled, open and accountable.

 

Mr Holtom concluded by thanking his vice-chairman, Mr Fred Mann, members (particularly Councillor Harvey whose insightful input would be missed), Mrs Lucy Youles, Monitoring Officer, and the democratic services team who continued to provide a high standard of support to the committee.

 

Members joined the Chairman and the Governance Portfolio Holder in thanking Mr Holtom and Mr Mann and the members of the Standards Committee.  Councillor Harvey thanked Mr Holtom for his kind words of support.

 

The Chairman of the Governance and Audit Committee to submit report number GAC002                                                        (Enclosure)

 

DECISION:

 

(1)     to note the annual report of the Chairman of the Governance and Audit Committee for 2009/10

(2)     to note the indicative work plan and timetable for 2010/11.

 

The Chairman of the Governance and Audit Committee, Councillor Lovelock, presented the committee’s annual report and in moving the recommendations it contained said that it was most important that members were aware of the work of the committee and its role.  He mentioned the support the committee received from Internal Audit, the District Auditor who occasionally attended the committee, as did the Chairman of the Resources PDG.  The motion was seconded.  The Assets and Resources portfolio holder commented on the thoroughness of the Internal Audit process which ensured that the council’s financial resources were well spent.

Report number DEM042 by the Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder.

                                                                                                (Enclosure)

 

DECISION:

 

(1)    To appoint the Leader to represent the Council on the Local Government Association General Assembly, with the Deputy Leader appointed to attend in her absence;

(2)    To appoint the Healthy Environment Portfolio Holder and Councillor Martin-Mayhew to represent the Council on the Local Government Association Rural Commission, with the Portfolio Holder holding the voting rights;

(3)    To appoint the Economic Development Portfolio Holder and Councillor Turner to represent the Council on the Local Government Association Urban Commission, with the Portfolio Holder holding the voting rights;

(4)    To appoint Councillors Mike Exton, Mrs Rosemary Kaberry-Brown, Bob Russell, and John Smith to represent the Council on the Kesteven Cultural Panel.

 

The Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder presented report number DEM042 which concerned a number of annual appointments to regional bodies and sought four appointments to the Kesteven Cultural Panel.

 

The Leader moved that the existing appointees on the three regional bodies be re-appointed for 2010/11 and that the following nominees be put forward for the Kesteven Cultural Panel:  Councillors Mike Exton, Mrs Rosemary Kaberry-Brown, Bob Russell, and John Smith.  The nominations were seconded and in the absence of any other nominations, a vote was taken and carried.

Report number AFM0137 by the Economic Development Portfolio Holder.

                                                                                                (Enclosure)

 

DECISION:

 

(1)    That the authority proceed with the proposed South Kesteven District Council Off-Street Parking Places Order 2009 following the consultation period;

(2)    The Order be made in accordance with the revised appendix to report AFM0137.

 

The Economic Development Portfolio Holder submitted report number AFM0137 which sought authority from the council to proceed with the proposed South Kesteven District Council Off-Street Parking Places Order 2009, following the consultation period.  The purpose of the new order was to prevent unauthorised use of the council’s non pay and display car parks at Trent Road, Arnoldfield, Dysart Park and the area to the entrance to Dysart Park off Bridge End Road, Wyndham Park, the entrance and parking area off Hill Avenue in Grantham.  The portfolio holder moved the making of the order and this was seconded.

 

The debate opened with a member requesting that the purpose and implications of the new order be communicated to the public in plain English.  Another member expressed concern that a new order was being introduced for only one part of the district when potentially there could be similar issues of unauthorised use elsewhere.  The Service Manager for Assets and Facilities clarified that problems of unauthorised use had only been identified in the areas to be covered by the order.  Other avenues to address the problem, working with the police, had not resolved the issue.

 

The member who had raised the concern stated that he was still of the opinion that the order should apply to the rest of the district in case problems occurred elsewhere.   The Chief Executive advised that the issue had been brought before the council prior to going out to consultation.  That was the stage at which amendments to the proposed order could have been made.  The Chairman then proceeded to call the vote following which the motion was carried.

 

 

[There was a break for refreshment between 3.37pm and 3.57pm.]

Report number SS0008 by the Healthy Environment Portfolio Holder.

                                                                                                            (Enclosure)

 

DECISION:  To commence formal public consultation in relation to the adoption of Dog Control Orders within South Kesteven District as attached to report number SS0008.

 

The Healthy Environment Portfolio Holder submitted report number SS0008 which, he said, referred to an issue that concerned many residents – the control of dogs and dog fouling in public places as a result of irresponsible ownership.  Members were advised that the proposed orders under the 2006 Regulations superseded the previous Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996 under which the council currently issued fixed penalty notices for dog fouling offences.  The new orders would allow volunteer employees of parish councils to act in an enforcement capacity and the portfolio holder was pleased to report that there had been interest expressed by a number of parish councils in taking up this opportunity.

 

Before moving the recommendation that formal consultation be undertaken on the adoption of Dog Control Orders, the Portfolio Holder advised members that a revised list of play areas to be covered by the orders was available in the Members’ Room.  The motion was seconded.

 

A member expressed concern that there were a number of locations in Stamford that were not presently included in the list.  The portfolio holder replied that there was an opportunity before the consultation was launched for members to put forward other suggested sites.

 

Concern was also expressed that the council would be making orders that it would not or could not enforce.  He hoped that there would be sufficient resources available to carry out the enforcement.  A comment was also made that those committing these offences did not do so within a 9 to 5 period.  Officers then responded to these points explaining that PCSO’s and other authorised officers of the council e.g. estate officers, would be able to carry out enforcement of these orders.  Assurances were given that times that officers trained in enforcement were out in the community would be monitored and resources would be focused on “hot spots” where the problem was most prevalent.  Councillor McBride outlined the role of PCSO’s in this regard who would be acting as agents of the council.

 

Members indicated their support for these enhanced controls, recognising that most problems were down to an irresponsible minority of dog owners.  It was hoped that those who were caught contravening the orders would be made an example of as well as proactive publicity about the dangers that dog fouling caused for children and pregnant women.  The portfolio holder responded by acknowledging these points and the importance of training for the officers in a common sense application of the regulations during which they may have to deal with some abusive people.

Report number DEM039 by the Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder.

                                                                                                (Enclosure)

 

DECISION:

 

(1)    That the Council carries out the statutory consultation with electors and other interested persons on the new executive arrangements using its website and SKToday;

(2)    To approve the proposed timetable as appended to report DEM039 for the consultation period and implementation of the new executive arrangements;

(3)    That a letter be sent on behalf of the Council to the Local Government Association to express this authority’s frustration at the amount of legislation passed by central government controlling the way local councils operate.

 

The Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder presented report number DEM039 which referred to the new statutory requirement upon the council to consult on and implement new executive arrangements under Part 3 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007.  The portfolio holder moved the recommendations contained in the report that the council’s website and its SKToday publication be used for consulting residents and other interested parties and the timetable for implementation be that as appended to the report.  The motion was seconded.

 

A member expressed concern that the proposed methods of consultation were not wide enough and should include direct consultation with all town and parish councils.  It was suggested that members could refer to the issue in their own newsletters and it could also be discussed at the summer round of Local Forums.  The member asked for clarification on what was meant by the public’s views being “taken into account” and requested that all group leaders be kept informed of the feedback received from the consultation.  The Monitoring Officer advised that the consultation was an opportunity for the public to comment on either of the two permissible models of executive arrangements; it was not a matter on which they could vote.  She also stated that copies of SKToday were sent to every household within the district thereby ensuring a wide coverage.

 

Further concerns were then expressed at what was seen as a further bureaucratic imposition by central government which would inevitably have cost implications.  It was questioned whether a six week consultation period would be sufficient for people to take in the detail of this new legislation.  Noting that the new executive arrangements provided for a Leader to be elected for a four year term of office, officers were asked what would happen if the political balance of a council was to change during that term of office.  The Monitoring Officer advised that constitutional provision could be made to remove a Leader by resolution of the council.

 

The Leader stated that although she agreed with the proposed consultation methods she was extremely frustrated at yet further intervention by central government over what local government could do for its communities.  She made the point that ten years ago local authorities were able to make far more local choices but a constant stream of legislation now fettered that choice.  Local councils’ time would be far better spent on doing what their communities wanted them to do.

 

In support of the Leader’s comments, another member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

Report number DEM043 by the Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder.

                                                                                                            (Enclosure)

 

DECISION:

 

(1)    To adopt the new Petitions scheme as required by the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009;

(2)    To set the threshold for debate at Council at 5,000 signatures, and for attendance at Scrutiny Committee 2,500 signatures;

(3)    In view of the timescales involved, the detailed work of the Council’s petitions scheme be referred to the Engagement PDG for consideration. The Access and Engagement Portfolio Holder be granted delegated authority to agree the details of the scheme following the recommendations of the PDG;

(4)    The Constitution Committee to consider consequent amendments to the Constitution for recommendation to Council.

 

Members had before them report number DEM043 which set out a new legislative requirement for all councils to adopt a formal petitions scheme by 15 June 2010.  The scheme must also include a formal procedure for dealing with electronic petitions but this aspect of the legislation came into force at a later date on 15 December 2010.

 

The Government had produced detailed statutory guidance, including a model petitions scheme which the council could adopt or adapt to suit local circumstances.  In presenting the report, the Access and Engagement portfolio holder referred to the very short timescale the council had to implement this new duty.  The statutory guidance and implementation date had only been notified to the council on 30 March 2010.  The portfolio holder moved the recommendations contained within the report that the detail of this authority’s scheme be considered by the Engagement PDG and its recommendations be referred to himself as portfolio holder.  Subsequent amendment to the Constitution would be considered by the Constitution Committee before referral to full Council for approval.  The motion was seconded.

 

The debate opened with a member welcoming the introduction of a formal scheme to deal with petitions.  He was of the view that this was something the council should have been doing years ago as it was an opportunity for the public to get their views across and issues debated by the council.  Concern was raised at the proposed threshold of 5,000 signatures to trigger debate at council and 2,500 signatures for referral to the Scrutiny Committee requiring attendance by a senior council officer.  Some members felt that this was too high.  It was proposed as an amendment that the thresholds be set at 1,000 signatures for both counts.  The amendment received a seconder.  Following a vote the amendment was lost.  A vote then took place on the original motion which was subsequently carried.

 

 

To note the list of questions asked under Council procedure rule 11.1 as circulated at the start of the meeting and their reference to the relevant Policy Development Group.

 

 

 

 

************************

 

 

 

 

NOTE: DEADLINE FOR NOTICES OF MOTION TO COUNCIL ON 17 JUNE 2010: Friday 2pm 4 June 2010

 

No questions on notice were submitted.

 

 

 

The meeting closed at 5.08pm.