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.

Question from Mrs. Mary Patrick, Essex Road, Stamford to Councillor Cartwright

Mrs. Patrick:

Councillor Mrs Cartwright, please can you tell me why adaptations are taking so long?

Reply (Councillor Mrs Cartwright):

This is a very timely question Mrs Patrick. We have been working to clear the backlog of 140 from last year but have been hampered by lack of staff in key posts.

We have now engaged consultants to speed the whole process.

Mrs. Patrick (Supplementary question):

Thank you Mrs Cartwright but there are 129 jobs still outstanding and there is a two-year delay for amputees getting facilities for cleanliness and everything – I think this is appalling. There has been a £600,000 budget since April; the total cost of those 129 jobs that need doing on average is £500,600. So, why has there been an almost 9 month delay using the £600,000 because my tenants are suffering, really suffering.

Reply (Councillor Mrs Cartwright):

We do apologise to tenants. We appreciate that each one of them deserves the adaption that has been put forward. What we have actually said was, to be fair, we would use a system of going for the ones that have been longest in the system. This doesn’t always make things easier, because some of them might be a little bit harder to do. We are doing our best to catch-up on this backlog now.  

[End of public open forum: 14:10]

The Chairman notified the Council that he had agreed to take an urgent item, namely the report on the SKDC Pension Policy, the “local scheme” as a result of legal opinion received on this matter and the consequent need to expedite matters. This would be considered as agenda item 10a.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Conboy, Dexter, F Hurst, J Hurst, N Radley, Steptoe and Turner.

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

Councillors Kirkman, Thompson, Mrs Percival, M Williams and Mrs Woods declared prejudicial and personal interests in Agenda item 9 relating to large scale voluntary transfer.

Councillors Bryant, Carpenter, Mrs Neal and John Smith declared personal interests in Agenda item 6 relating to the Welland Joint Committee.

The minutes of the meeting held on 25^th May, 22^nd June, and 20^th July 2006 were signed as a correct record by the chairman subject to the following:-

25^th May – Questions without discussion: Question 11: The response was by Councillor Mrs Neal not Councillor Mrs Cartwright.

20^th July (2.00pm meeting) – Page 4, Minute 51 last paragraph, line 7 – replace “unbiased” with “biased”

20^th July (4.00pm meeting) – It should be noted that none of the members who had declared prejudicial interests in this matter had taken part in the discussions or voting. Also this meeting was not headed up as an extraordinary one.

The Chief Executive advised that minutes were a record of what had taken place, events that did not take place could not be recorded in the minutes.

The Chairman announced that, following a straw poll of members, the committee rooms in the Civic Suite would henceforth be known as

Chairman’s Room – Witham Room

Committee Room 1 – Welland Room

New Committee Room – Glen Room

Committee Room 2 would serve as the Chaiman’s Room for the time being but in future it will revert to being the Chairman’s Room and be known as such.

The Chairman advised that one item listed in his list of civic events (Presentation of prizes for the Golding Shield) had not taken place due to the inclement weather.  

Report number DLS82 by the Legal Services Manager.     (Enclosure)

DECISION:

That this Council delegates to the Welland Joint Committee authority to carry out the functions of procurement.  

The Council had before them report DLS 82 of the Legal Services Manager which recommended that the council should delegate to the Welland Joint Committee authority to carry out the functions of procurement on behalf of the District Council, in the interests of economy and efficiency. There was no duplication in respect of the Council’s other arrangements with Lincolnshire County Council.

The motion was proposed by Councillor Bryant and duly seconded. Councillor Mrs Woods moved an amendment that the Council ask for further details on what the items for procurement were and what procedures the council was going to follow. This amendment was duly seconded, voted upon and lost.

A member asked whether the ethical side of procurement would be referred back to the Council for agreement. The Chief Executive advised that a delegation would not allow this but that this was a matter that could be subject to scrutiny. Concerns were also expressed about the possible effects on small businesses, but the contrary view was expressed that small businesses might benefit from this approach.

The substantive motion was put the vote and carried.

Report number CHFR15 by the Corporate Head of Finance and Resources.  (Enclosure)

DECISION:

That the medium Term Financial Strategy attached as Appendix A to report CHFR15 be approved

The Council had before them report CHFR15 of the Corporate Head of Finance and Resources which set out the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2006/7 to 20011/12 plus a budget preparation strategy for approval.

The strategy identified a number of fundamental principles, which may be summarised as;

Principle 1 – The Community Strategy, Corporate Plan and Annual Performance Plan drive the allocation of resources

Principle 2 – Manage financial resources to achieve efficiency and value for money, whilst maintaining a balance between quality and cost effectiveness

Principle 3 – Maintain flexibility to respond to a changing local government environment

Principle 4 – Maintain a substantial revenue budget

Principle 5 – Maintain a prudent  approach when making estimates of external funding from Government

Principle 6 – Identify and seek opportunities for external funding whilst maintaining prudent estimates of realisable funding

Principle 7 – Manage the Council’s assets, reserves, balances and receipts to optimise financial returns for future investment in he Council’s priorities for the benefit of the community

Principle 8 – Maintain a robust capital strategy to support deliverable medium term capital programmes

Principle 9 – Improve treasury management performance

Principle 10 – Balance the need to meet local taxation demands with community aspirations and ability of local taxpayers to meet them

Principle 11 – Maintain a robust fees and charges strategy

Principle 12 – Manage the impact of the introduction of local area agreements

Principle 13 – deliver the priorities of the Council without exposing the Council to unnecessary risks by targeting the use of resources linked to corporate risk

Principle 14 – Manage the financial viability of the housing revenue account (HRA) and ballot tenants on the preferred option of LSVT to provide the investment required to deliver tenant aspirations.

The Chairman of the Resources DSP confirmed that the draft Strategy had been scrutinised at the DSPs last meeting and it would be subject to further scrutiny at the next meeting of the Resources DSP on September 28^th.

Questions and comments were also made by members in relation to

• The national bus pass scheme due for implementation in April 2008
• The level of reserves in the pension fund   
• Tourism

The motion was moved, duly seconded and carried.

Report number CEX348 by the Chief Executive.        (Enclosure)

DECISION:

That the Council approve the format of the annual Stakeholders Conference from 10.00am to 4.00pm on 7^th December in the form of a parish and town council conference, with all councils within the District being invited to send delegates, the exact numbers per council to be agreed with the Lincolnshire Association of Local Councils (LALC), but to be a maximum of two per council.

The Council considered report CEX348 of the Chief Executive which advised that, following discussions with LALC, it was proposed the this year’s annual stakeholder conference should take the form of a parish and town councilsconference. The timing would provide an opportunity to consider the contents of the green or white paper expectedto be issued shortly.

The motion was proposed, seconded and carried.  

Report number TSE9 by the Director of Tenancy Services.   (Enclosure)

DECISION:

(1) That the responses from tenants be considered initially by a joint meeting of members of the LSVT Working Group and the Offer Review Working Group and that they make recommendations to Council as to the content of the Council’s Stage 2 Notice;

(2) That the Council considers the responses from tenants and the recommendations from the joint meeting of the above working groups, then decides on the content of the Stage 2 Notice at an extraordinary meeting of the Council to be held on 12^th October 2006; and

(3) That the provisional arrangements made for conducting the ballot, as detailed in the report, be approved.  

CouncillorsKirkman, Mrs Percival, Thompson, M Williams and Mrs Woods declared personal and prejudicial interests in this item, left the room during its consideration and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon. 

Further to the extraordinary meeting of the Council held on 20^th July 2006, the Council considered report TSE9 of the Director of Tenancy Services which explained the process from the issuing of the formal consultation (offer) document through to ballot, including the consideration of responses from tenants and the arrangements made for conducting the ballot.

Since the start of stock transfer ballots nationally in 1988 all such ballots had been conducted by Electoral Reform Services (ERS) who had developed a national reputation for efficiency and impartiality at modest cost, it was therefore proposed to use ERS to conduct the ballot. The ballot paper and question had been agreed by the LSVT Working Group and ERS would send this to all tenants as notified by the Council, there would also be an advice line for tenants run by ERS. The ballot was secret and would not reveal to theCouncil until the end of the process which way tenants had been voting. The Chief Executive would ask ERS if information as to the total number of votes cast per ward was available.

In response to a question by a member, it was confirmed that the ballot was likely to take place in November 2006.

The motion was duly moved, seconded and carried.    

(The Council adjourned from 3.35-3.50pm)

Report number CEX347 by the Chief Executive.     (Enclosure)

DECISION:

That,

(1)      In future the Chief Executive’s appraisal panel comprise three members, two from the Administration Group (The Leader and Deputy Leader) and one nominated by the largest minority group on the Council; and 

(2) No substitutes be allowed.

The Council consider report CEX347 of the Chief Executive on thecomposition of the Chief Executive’s appraisal and Appointments Panel, which also formed the Panel for the appointment of strategic directors. During the course of the introductory remarks the Chief Executive declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this matter and left the Chamber during its consideration.

In introducing this item, the Leader of the Council explained that Membership of this Panel had been determined at the Annual Council meeting on 25^th May 2006. The report advised that the Panel was subject to the rules of proportionality although the allocation of seats to the non administration groups could be varied by agreement. Council discussed whether the Panel should be comprised of three, four or five members, the view was expressed that an odd number was better than an even one, to avoid a situation where the casting vote would have to be used. One view expressed was that it should be five in order that more than two political groups (plus the Administration Group) would be able to take part in the Chief Executive’s appraisal.

The Leader of the Council commented that this report was not politically motivated and she would not make appointments on political grounds, the recent process for the appointment of DSP chairmen was evidence of this.  

The motion was duly proposed, seconded and carried.

DECISION:

That,

(1) the Council endorse the following actions taken by the Chief Executive:

                                                  i.                  The enquiry into the lawfulness of the local scheme;

                                                ii.          The suspension of this scheme in the light of the information received;

                                              iii.          The intention to notify all persons who have benefited from the scheme once the case by case review is concluded;

                                              iv.          The launch of an investigation into how the current scheme came to be established, what professional advice was provided at the time, how the scheme has been operated and whether members have been kept informed;

(2) That a panel comprising the Leader, Portfolio holder for Resources and Chairman of the Resources DSP be appointed to oversee the investigation referred to at (iv) above;

(3) That in view of the legal advice received the Council terminates the local scheme provisions within the approved pension policy forthwith; and

(4) That a further report be made to the next ordinary meeting of the Council.  

The Chairman gave notice that he would allow this item to be considered as urgent business because of the need to take action and begin investigations into this matter as soon as possible in view of the legal advice received from Counsel.

Council had before them report CEX352 of the Chief Executive which advised that the impending legislative requirements in respect of age discrimination had triggered a fundamental review of the Council’s pensions policies and practices. As part of this review the current pensions policy, and in particular the so called “local scheme” initiated in 1996, had been referred to Counsel whose opinion was that it was unlawful. The Chief Executive had therefore suspended the scheme pending this report to Council and the seeking of a second opinion.

It was confirmed that those Members who were Members of the Council when the scheme was introduced in 1996 did not have an interest to declare at the present time.

The scheme was now being reviewed on a case by case basis. Internal and external audit were being kept informed and the actions of the Chief Executive had been endorsed by the Council’s Monitoring Officer and S.151 Officer.

After discussion, the motion was duly moved, seconded and carried.

Six questions had been submitted prior to the meeting. Verbatim details of the questions, together with supplementary questions and responses, are set out in the appendix to these minutes.

SKDC PENSION POLICY: THE “LOCAL SCHEME”

The Chairman has agreed to take this under item 12 as a matter of urgency.  The urgency arises from the need to take certain actions, detailed in the report, that have become apparent following receipt of legal opinion that was not received until after the agenda had been finalised and despatched.

Report number CEX352 by the Chief Executive.                      (Enclosure)

The meeting closed at 16:53.