Agenda and decisions

The Hearing Review Panel was convened to determine whether a breach of the Councillor Code of Conduct had occurred. A complaint was submitted to the Monitoring Officer by Councillors Ashley Baxter and Phil Dilks (the ‘Complainants’) in relation to the conduct of Councillor Charmaine Morgan (the ‘Subject Member’). This was progressed in accordance with the Council's procedure for dealing with complaints against Councillors. The matter was referred to this Sub-Committee following an investigation; the written outcome of which forms part of this Sub-Committee’s papers which were circulated to all parties prior to the meeting.

It was outlined that the Subject Member could not attend the meeting due to ill health but her appointed representative confirmed that she was content for the Panel to continue in her absence. The Panel confirmed that they were content to proceed with the hearing in the Subject Member’s absence.

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to elect Councillor Pam Byrd as Chairman of the meeting.

There were none.

No such requests were made.

This report provides the Hearing Review Panel with information relating to a complaint by Councillors Ashley Baxter and Phil Dilks against Councillor Charmaine Morgan which is the subject of a Hearing, in accordance with the Council's procedure for dealing with complaints against Councillors.

The Investigating Officer presented their report to the Panel.

The report summarised that the Subject Member had been subject to complaints from two Members, alleging that she had breached the Code of Conduct by misusing her position as Chairman of SKDC’s Planning Committee by instructing, and thereby seeking to influence, a Town Council officer to amend the consultation response received from the Town Council in relation to a live planning application to the Council which Councillor Morgan had ‘called-in’. It was further alleged that in doing so, Councillor Morgan also sought to inappropriately alter the established governance arrangements between the Town Council and the Council, compromise the impartiality of the Town Council officer and was disrespectful to them too. The Complainants further alleged that Councillor Morgan’s actions raised issues of apparent bias, predetermination, misuse of position, and failure to properly register an interest in that she also had not declared her position on the Town Council Planning Committee on her Council register of interests.

Respect

The Investigating Officer’s report deemed that the requirement to treat local authority employees, employees and representatives of partner organisations and those volunteering for the local authority with respect and respect the role they play had not been breached.

Impartiality of Officers (of the Council)

The Investigating Officer deemed that there was no basis on which to find that the Subject Member had compromised the impartiality of officers as the Officer in question was a town clerk, and not an Officer of SKDC.

Disrepute

The Investigating Officer deemed that there had been a breach of the Code of Conduct by the Subject Member with regard to bringing her role as a Member and the Council into disrepute. It was the Investigating Officer’s assertion that Councillor Morgan’s email of 27 November 2025 to the Clerk could reasonably have been perceived by a member of the public as the Chair of Planning Committee seeking to bring pressure upon the Town Council to re-submit its response to a planning application due to be determined by the Council’s Planning Committee. Also suggesting revised terms of the response so it aligned with objections to the application which the Subject Member knew she and others planned to make.

The Investigating Officer considered Councillor Morgan’s actions could reasonably be regarded as reducing the public’s confidence in her ability to discharge her role as a member of the Council and Chair of the Planning Committee and could also be reasonably regarded as reducing public confidence in the Council’s  ability to properly discharge its function as a local planning authority.

Misuse of Position

The Investigating Officer deemed there was sufficient evidence upon which to find that the Subject Member had breached the Code of Conduct in relation to misuse of position.

In the Investigating Officer’s view, the Subject Member’s actions may reasonably be perceived as attempting to improperly use her position as a district councillor and Chair of the Council’s Planning Committee to influence the outcome of a planning application to the advantage of those  ...  view the full decision text for item 5.