| Time: | 7.30pm | Place: | Council Chamber, Council Offices, Gernon Road, Letchworth Garden City |
| PRESENT: | Councillor Tricia Cowley (Chairman), Councillor R.L. Shakespeare - Smith (Vice-Chairman), Councillor Mrs A.G. Ashley, Councillor Alan Bardett, Councillor Clare Billing, Councillor Judi Billing, Councillor John Booth, Councillor P.C.W. Burt, Councillor Paul Clark (until 9.00pm), Councillor Julian Cunningham, Councillor Bill Davidson, Councillor Jane Gray, Councillor Jean Green, Councillor Gary Grindal, Councillor John Harris, Councillor Simon Harwood, Councillor Steve Hemingway, Councillor Fiona Hill, Councillor T.W. Hone, Councillor Tony Hunter, Councillor S.K. Jarvis, Councillor Sal Jarvis, Councillor David Kearns, Councillor Lorna Kercher, Councillor Joan Kirby, Councillor David Leal - Bennett, Councillor David Levett, Councillor Bernard Lovewell, Councillor Sandra Lunn, Councillor Ian Mantle, Councillor Alan Millard, Councillor Gerald Morris, Councillor M.R.M. Muir, Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham, Councillor Frank Radcliffe, Councillor Mike Rice, Councillor Deepak Sangha, Councillor Deborah Segalini, Councillor Adrian Smith, Councillor Mrs C.P.A. Strong, Councillor R.A.C. Thake and Councillor M.E. Weeks. |
| IN ATTENDANCE: | Chief Executive, Strategic Director of Customer Services, Strategic Director of Finance, Policy and Governance, Accountancy Manager, Acting Corporate Legal Manager, Democratic Services Manager and Committee and Member Services Manager. |
| ALSO PRESENT: | 15 members of the public |
| Meeting attachment |
Agenda Front Pages |
| Item | Description/Resolution | Status | Action | |
| PART I | ||||
| 62 |
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from Councillors D.J. Barnard, John Bishop, Faye Frost, Cathryn Henry, Ben Lewis, Jim McNally and A.D. Young. |
Noted | ||
| 63 |
MINUTES Minutes It was moved by Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham, seconded by Councillor T.W. Hone, and RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 22 January 2015 be approved as a true record and signed by the Chairman. |
Agreed | ||
| 64 |
NOTIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS No additional business was presented for consideration by the Council. |
Noted | ||
| 65 |
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS (1) Long Service Awards (a) Karl Wilkins The Chairman announced that Karl's first jobs were in engineering and then printing and book keeping. However, he always had a keen interest in trees and in 1990 at the age of 26 he joined the Council as an apprentice tree surgeon. He was quick to learn and within 9 months he was promoted to charge-hand. When the tree maintenance service was contracted out, Karl branched out to provide temporary cover for the Council's Client Tree Officer post. He was then appointed Tree Strategy Officer and, on the retirement of the Tree Officer, Karl took on this role and now singlehandedly managed all of the Council's tree works. Outside work, Karl lived happily with his partner Gina and their teenage son Sam. Karl had a diverse range of hobbies, including motorbikes, keeping Koi Carp and attending Rock concerts. However, his favourite pastime was called ‘Air Soft'. This was very much an adult version of paint-balling where Karl enjoyed eliminating his opponents by hitting them with non-metallic pellets launched via replica firearms called Airsoft guns. (b) Ian Fullstone The Chairman advised that Ian joined North Herts District Council in February 1990 as an Assistant Building Control Surveyor and progressed his career through internal promotions until he became Building Control Manager in 2006 and then Head of Development and Building Control in 2009. Ian had always applied his commercial acumen to the approach of his team because Building Control had, for many years, been in competition with the private sector. Ian's team had run building control contracts for many specialised areas of construction throughout the country and had been an industry leader in the construction of new hospital complexes. Ian was currently Project lead for the "Hertfordshire 7" initiative which was developing the business case for 7 Councils to join forces for Building Control services and create a commercial trading division. It was moved by the Chairman, seconded by Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham, and RESOLVED: That the Council places on record its sincere thanks to Karl Wilkins and Ian Fullstone for their long and valuable service to local government in North Hertfordshire. The Chairman announced that Karl and Ian had been unable to attend the meeting, but that she would ensure that their awards were passed to them in the near future. (2) Declarations of Interest The Chairman reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question. (3) Mr David Payne - Hammersmatch The Chairman had the sad duty to report that the Managing Director of Hammersmatch, had passed away on 29 January 2015. She undertook to pass on the Council's condolences to Mr Payne's family and colleagues. |
Noted | ||
| 66 |
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Mr Robin Dartington (Keep Hitchin Special) Re: Churchgate Area, Hitchin - Next Steps Mr Robin Dartington advised that Keep Hitchin Special (KHS) was disappointed with the officer report. KHS had thought that the Council was investigating how something might be done on the Churchgate site in the short term, but the report spoke of "project". He asked if the Council had secretly fixed on a particular scheme. The report asked for additional funding for legal and valuation - if a scheme was not fixed, was that premature? In respect of the proposed 150 year lease, Mr Dartington stated that KHS thought the Council was looking for a stop gap, to do what it could in the gap before the long held aim of total redevelopment of the Churchgate Centre became possible - perhaps after 2031 when consultants had advised the Local Plan that the District would once again need extra retail space. How was a 150 year lease a stop gap? Surely any additional lease to Hammersmatch ought only to match the unexpired term on the current lease? Mr Dartington advised that the biggest worry of KHS was regarding the future of Hitchin Market. The Hammersmatch scheme was to build a cinema at the top of the current market site and use the rest for a car park to serve the cinema. Hammersmatch had made it clear that the market had to go. Providing a market site was a Council responsibility, it was up to the Council to decide where it would be located. The Council had been advising Hammersmatch that, if they wished the market to move, then find an alternative site. This appeared to be a stalemate. Mr Dartington commented that the report now stated (Paragraph 8.5.1) that Hammersmatch were happy to work with Council officers and specialists to find a solution. KHS's worry was that Hammersmatch had produced 10 schemes over the years since 2001, all showing the Market on an alternative site, none acceptable to the traders. So how was a solution suddenly to be found now? What did these specialists know that the traders in Hitchin Market did not? The fear was that it was intended to use specialists as hatchet men - to cut the market down to size and cram it in a corner. Is that what underlaid the statements in the report that ‘specialist advice and alternative resources' would be required in seeking a solution without mentioning consulting the traders - or the public who used the market - or the businesses in Hitchin who benefitted from the increased footfall on market days? Mr Dartington stated that Paragraph 8.5.1 also started off by saying that a solution was needed to the market because future re-location would affect revenue to the Council, improvement costs and management arrangements. Yes, it would, but that was a bleak way to view the problem. Hitchin Market, along with St Mary's and the Market Place, was in the forefront of the character and identity of Hitchin. Hitchin Market was perhaps the largest in the eastern region, offering up to 200 stalls on some days, many selling local produce. Its permanent stalls offered many traders a way to start a business, until they had grown to the point they could take a shop - a big leap upwards. It drew visitors from as far afield as London. Mr Dartington advised that if officers thought Hitchin would accept a diminished, characterless grid of standard stalls - like Cambridge or Norwich, they were making a big misjudgement. KHS considered that the recommendations in Section 2 of the report should be put in reverse order. Investigations should continue, yes - a solution for the Market should be found (or more likely be shown to be impossible) - and only then should the Council even consider granting a 150 year lease that would fix Churchgate effectively for all time - and only after that should the Council invest more in legal and valuation fees to progress the Hammersmatch scheme. Mr Dartington concluded by stating that KHS were sorry to see so little imagination being applied to find the right option. Section 4 of the report: Alternative Options considered, said see Section 8. Section 8 was, however, headed "THE NEXT STEPS". KHS felt that officers were not seeking any other options. KHS offered an alternative option. Hammersmatch's idea to build a new range across the top of the market, to seal off the Churchgate Centre from being degraded by contact with the Market, was sound. But why did it have to contain a cinema that required the market to be moved from the rest of the site? Just build the buffer, but put in a Market Cafe, new market toilets and community space, and Hitchin Market could then stay the same size by running straight down to Queen Street after the old toilets were removed. The Chairman thanked Mr Dartington for his presentation. |
Noted | ||
| 67 |
CHURCHGATE AREA, HITCHIN - NEXT STEPS Report Appendix A - Site Plan from Churchgate Planning Brief The Council considered the report of the Project Executive for the Churchgate Project Board in respect of the Churchgate Area, Hitchin - next steps. The following appendix was submitted with the report: Appendix A - Site Plan from Churchgate Planning Brief. The Leader of the Council (Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham) refuted the claim made by Mr Dartington that the Council was looking towards a stop-gap solution for Churchhgate. She further commented that the Churchgate Project Board had never been advised that Hammersmatch were not in favour of retaining Hitchin Market. The Leader of the Council introduced and summarised the report, including the next steps in the project relating to seeking quotations for an independent valuation of the site; further discussions with Hammersmatch and other interested parties; investigating revenue implications for the Council; finding a solution for the Hitchin Market; and additional funding requirements. It was moved by Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham, seconded by Councillor David Leal-Bennett and, following debate, was RESOLVED: (1) That an initial budget of up to £40,000 be committed at this stage to undertake an independent valuation of the site, any commercial and legal advice as may be required; (2) That the principle of a lease to a developer of the site for a minimum term of 150 years subject to contract be accepted, and granted only upon completion of the whole of any agreed redevelopment; (3) That the Council continues to require all interested developers on the Churchgate site to seek a solution for the market, at the developers' expense, in consultation with appropriate officers; and (4) That officers continue to investigate the Council's preferred approach for a smaller scheme in the short term and report back to Full Council setting out options and points for consideration to progress the project. REASON FOR DECISION: To allow the Council to continue with its investigations for a smaller scheme in the short term and provide clarity on its preferred options going forward. |
Agreed | ||
| 68 |
ELECTORAL SERVICES - SCALE OF FEES 2015/16 Report Appendix A - Recommended Scale of Fees 2015/16 The Council considered the report of the Chief Executive in respect of Electoral Services - Scale of Fees 2015/16. The following appendix was submitted with the report: Appendix A - Recommended Scale of Fees 2015/16. It was moved by Councillor J.M. Cunningham, seconded by Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham, and RESOLVED: That the Scale of Electoral Services Fees for 2015/16, as set out at Appendix A to the report, be approved. REASON FOR DECISION: To enable the Council to set a Scale of Fees for 2015/16. |
Agreed | ||
| 69 |
ITEM REFERRED FROM CABINET: 27 JANUARY 2015 - CORPORATE BUSINESS PLANNING - BUDGET 2015/16 Referral Addendum Report Appendix 1 - High Level General Fund forecasts Appendix 2 - General Fund Summary for 2015/16 Appendix 3 - Expenditure reduction proposals Appendix 4 - Income generation proposals Appendix 5 - Revenue Investment proposals Appendix 6 - MTFS extract - budget assumptions Appendix 7 - Description of earmarked reserves Appendix 8 - Financial Risks assessment Leader of the Council's Budget Speech Portfolio Holder for Finance and IT's Budget Speech The Council considered the Minute of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 27 January 2015, in respect of Corporate Business Planning - Budget 2015/16 (Minute 104 refers). A copy of the report and addendum report considered by the Cabinet was included with the agenda, as were the following appendices: Appendix 1 - High Level General Fund Forecasts; Appendix 2 - General Fund Summary for 2015/16; Appendix 3 - Expenditure reduction proposals; Appendix 4 - Income generation proposals; Appendix 5 - Revenue investment proposals; Appendix 6 - MTFS Extract - Budget assumptions; Appendix 7 - Description of earmarked reserves; and Appendix 8 - Financial Risks assessment. The Council was provided with a further addendum report, tabled at the meeting, which detailed the Parish and Town Council precepts for 2015/16 and total District Council Tax requirement for 2015/16. Prior to the consideration of the Budget Setting for 2015/16, the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Finance and IT presented a Budget Speech. These documents are reproduced at Appendices A and B to these Minutes. It was moved by Councillor T.W. Hone, and seconded by Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham, that the recommendations contained in the Cabinet referral and the addendum report tabled at the meeting be approved. The Leader of the Labour Group (Councillor Judi Billing), Shadow Portfolio Holder for Finance and I.T. (Councillor David Kearns) and Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group (Councillor S.K. Jarvis) gave responses to the speeches made by the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Finance and IT. As an amendment, it was moved by Councillor David Kearns, and seconded by Councillor Frank Radcliffe, that "(A) Recommendation (5) in Minute 104 be deleted and replaced with: That the inclusion of the efficiency and investment proposals in the final General Fund budget estimates for 2015/16, as set out in Appendices 3 to 5 of the report, plus (1) Paperless council meetings (I-pads for Members) - £21,000 (Revenue savings in year 1 £9,000, and £30,000 after that; (2) Administration and interest loss - £60,000 (for running a new £150,000 Local Capital Fund based on population and not to be any larger than £300,000 at any one time); (3) External review of Management Structure and review how the Council could become more entrepreneurial - £50,000 (anticipated to be recouped by savings generated); (4) Implement the living wage in establishment - £22,000; (B) Delete in Recommendation (6) of Minute 104 £16.060million, and replace with £27,900,800 total gross expenditure, and £16.154million net expenditure, and General Fund balances of £5.600million and total balances of £7,342,600; and (C) Delete in Recommendation (7) of Minute 104 1.9% and replace with 1.99%." Following debate and upon being put to the vote, the amendment was lost. As a further amendment, it was moved by Councillor S.K. Jarvis, and seconded by Councillor Sal Jarvis, that a 0% Council Tax rise be approved for 2015/16. Upon being put to the vote, this amendment was lost. Upon the substantive motion being put to the vote, it was RESOLVED: (1) That it be noted that the provisional finance settlement for 2015/16 is £4.361million, which is broadly in line with previous estimates, and that it be further noted that the final settlement announcement is expected in late January/early February 2015; (2) That the estimated position on the Collection Fund, as referred to in Section 9.1 of the report, be noted, and that: - a contribution of £1.2million from the General Fund to the Collection Fund be made in respect of Business Rates to cover the share of the deficit position; and - a contribution of £83,000 to the General Fund from the Collection Fund be made in respect of Council Tax for the share of the surplus position; (3) That the position relating to the Council's General Fund balance be noted, and that due to the risks identified in Paragraph 9.2.3 of the report, a minimum balance of £1.673million is recommended to be maintained for the known and unknown financial risks, and that it is prudent to maintain reserves at a higher level to ensure continued sustainability over the medium to longer term given the current uncertainties about future funding; (4) That the position of the Council's other reserves and provisions, as identified in Section 9.3 of the report, and that the Chief Finance Officer considers the estimates robust and the budgeted level of reserves adequate, be noted; (5) That the inclusion of the efficiency and investment proposals in the final General Fund budget estimates for 2015/16, as set out in Appendices 3 to 5 of the report, be approved; (6) That the estimated 2015/16 net expenditure of £16.060million, as detailed in Appendix 2 of the report be approved; (7) That a 1.9% increase on the Council Tax rate for 2015/2016 be agreed; (8) That the Parish and Town Council precepts for 2015/16 of £966,052 be noted; and (9) That the total District Council Tax requirement for 2015/16 of £10,819,798 be noted. REASON FOR DECISION: To ensure that all relevant factors are taken into consideration when arriving at the proposed Council Tax precept for 2015/16; and to ensure that a balanced budget is agreed. [The voting in respect of the above resolution was as follows: FOR (25): Councillor Mrs A.G. Ashley Councillor A. Bardett Councillor John Booth Councillor P.C.W. Burt Councillor Julian Cunningham Councillor Bill Davidson Councillor Jane Gray Councillor Jean Green Councillor John Harris Councillor Simon Harwood Councillor Steve Hemingway Councillor Fiona Hill Councillor T.W. Hone Councillor Tony Hunter Councillor David Leal-Bennett Councillor David Levett Councillor Bernard Lovewell Councillor Alan Millard Councillor Gerald Morris Councillor M.R.M. Muir Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham Councillor Mike Rice Councillor R.L. Shakespeare-Smith Councillor R.A.C. Thake Councillor Michael Weeks AGAINST (14): Councillor Clare Billing Councillor Judi Billing Councillor Gary Grindal Councillor Sal Jarvis Councillor S.K. Jarvis Councillor David Kearns Councillor Lorna Kercher Councillor Joan Kirby Councillor Sandra Lunn Councillor Ian Mantle Councillor Frank Radcliffe Councillor Deepak Sangha Councillor Deborah Segalini Councillor Adrian Smith ABSENTIONS (0) DID NOTE VOTE (2): Councillor Tricia Cowley Councillor Mrs C.P.A. Strong ALREADY LEFT THE MEETING (1): Councillor Paul Clark] |
Agreed | ||
| 70 |
ITEM REFERRED FROM CABINET: 27 JANUARY 2015 - CAPITAL PROGRAMME 2015/16 ONWARDS Referral Appendix A - Capital Programme Summary Appendix B - Capital Programme Detail Appendix C - Capital Investment Proposals for 2015/16 and onwards The Council considered the Minute of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 27 January 2015, in respect of the Capital Programme - 2015/16 Onwards (Minute 105 refers). A copy of the report considered by the Cabinet was included with the agenda, as were the following appendices: Appendix A - Capital Programme Summary; Appendix B - Capital Programme Detail; Appendix C - Capital Investment Proposals for 2015/16 and onwards. The Portfolio Holder for Finance and IT (Councillor T.W. Hone) referred to an addition to Recommendation (3), tabled at the meeting, which added the following words: "…,and that Council notes that approval of the 2015/16 capital programme will entail a commitment to initial expenditure of up to £220,000 representing approximately 7% of the total cost of the North Hertfordshire Leisure Centre project (listed as proposals C5 to C11 in Appendix C) to engage a professional team to develop a detailed cost estimate and that further development of the project, and hence commitment to the remaining 93% of the cost, will be subject to a further report to Cabinet detailing this and the formal tender bid from Stevenage Leisure Limited. Members should note that if the scheme does not proceed any initial expenditure incurred would be charged to the general fund." It was moved by Councillor T.W. Hone, seconded by Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham and, following debate and upon being put to the vote, it was RESOLVED: (1) That the Capital Investment Proposals, as listed in Appendix C to the report and which total £18.494million overall (£9.331million profiled in 2015/16), be approved for inclusion in the proposed Capital Programme; (2) That the changes to the schemes (as detailed in Appendix C to the report) which are an on-going commitment in the Capital Programme be noted: - Cease the commitment to the Tenant Cash Incentive Scheme; - Withdraw the £500,000 per annum budget for the Housing Association Grant Scheme and consider bids on an individual basis; - Maintain the same level of funding (total budget £745,000 per annum) for the Disabled Facility Grant Scheme; - Increase the annual budget for the Home Repair Assistance Grants scheme from £35,000 to £60,000; and (3) That the provisional Capital Programme for 2015/16 to 2018/19 of £20.5million, as detailed at Appendices A and B to the report, be adopted, and that Council notes that approval of the 2015/16 capital programme will entail a commitment to initial expenditure of up to £220,000 representing approximately 7% of the total cost of the North Hertfordshire Leisure Centre project (listed as proposals C5 to C11 in Appendix C) to engage a professional team to develop a detailed cost estimate and that further development of the project, and hence commitment to the remaining 93% of the cost, will be subject to a further report to Cabinet detailing this and the formal tender bid from Stevenage Leisure Limited. Members should note that if the scheme does not proceed any initial expenditure incurred would be charged to the general fund. REASON FOR DECISION: To ensure that the Capital Programme meets the Council's objectives and officers can plan the implementation of the approved schemes. |
Agreed | ||
| 71 |
ITEM REFERRED FROM CABINET: 27 JANUARY 2015 - TREASURY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FOR 2015/16 Referral Appendix A - Treasury Management Policy Statement Appendix B - Treasury Management Practices Appendix C - Treasury Strategy Statement The Council considered the Minute of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 27 January 2015, in respect of the proposed Treasury Management Strategy for 2015/16 (Minute 106 refers). A copy of the report considered by the Cabinet was included with the agenda, as were the following appendices: Appendix A - Treasury Management Policy Statement; Appendix B - Treasury Management Practices; Appendix C - Treasury Strategy Statement. It was moved by Councillor T.W. Hone, seconded by Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham, and was RESOLVED: (1) That the Treasury limits for 2015/16 be approved as follows: (i) Interest Rate Exposure (as at Paragraph 3.4, Appendix C); (ii) Maturity Structure of Borrowing (as at Paragraph 3.4, Appendix C); (iii) Investment Strategy to continue to use Building Societies and UK Banks, as detailed in Paragraph 8.5.1 of the report (as at Paragraph 4.2, Appendix C); (iv) Total Principal Sums invested for periods longer than 364 days (as at Paragraph 4.3, Appendix C); and (2) That the Treasury Management Strategy for 2015/16, as set out at Appendix C to the report, be approved; REASON FOR DECISION: To ensure the Council's continued compliance with CIPFA's Code of Practice on Treasury Management and the Local Government Act 2003 and that the Council manages its exposure to interest and capital risk. |
Agreed | ||
| 72 |
ITEM REFERRED FROM CABINET: 27 JANUARY 2015 - AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNCIL'S FINANCIAL REGULATIONS Referral Appendix A - Summary of main changes Appendix B - Revised Financial Regulations Appendix C - Revised Financial Regulations, showing track changes The Council considered the Minute of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 27 January 2015, in respect of the proposed amendments to the Council's Financial Regulations (Minute 107 refers). A copy of the report considered by the Cabinet was included with the agenda, as were the following appendices: Appendix A - Summary of main changes; Appendix B - Revised Financial Regulations; and Appendix C - Revised Financial Regulations, showing track changes. It was moved by Councillor T.W. Hone, seconded by Councillor Mrs L.A. Needham, and was RESOLVED: That the amendments to the Council's Financial Regulations, as set out within Appendix B to the report, and summarised in Appendix A to the report, be adopted. REASON FOR DECISION: To ensure that the Council's Financial Regulations remain relevant and fit for purpose, thereby contributing to effective organisational internal control. |
Agreed | ||
| 73 |
ITEM REFERRED FROM CABINET: 27 JANUARY 2015 - NORTH HERTFORDSHIRE MUSEUM AND COMMUNITY FACILITY AT HITCHIN TOWN HALL - PROJECT UPDATE Referral [(1) Prior to the consideration of this item, Councillors Bernard Lovewell, Peter Burt and Julian Cunningham declared that they would be withdrawing from the Chamber, as they were Members of the Cabinet Sub-Committee (Council Charities), which was responsible for making decisions on the North Hertfordshire Museum and Community Facility on behalf of the Hitchin Town Hall: Gymnasium and Workmans Hall Trust. (2) Prior to the consideration of this item, and following advice from the Monitoring Officer, the Members of the Standards Committee, namely Councillors Judi Billing, Bill Davidson, Steve Hemingway, David Kearns, Alan Millard, M.R.M. Muir and Mike Rice, withdrew from the Chamber for the duration of this item.] The Monitoring Officer advised that Members would be aware from the recent Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting on this project, and subsequent press coverage, that Councillor David Leal-Bennett was advised that in the view of the Monitoring Officer, he had a close association with Hitchin Town Hall Limited, as set out in Paragraphs 4.6(a) and/or (b) of the Code of Conduct adopted by Full Council. The requirements of the Code of Conduct are that whilst he could speak as a member of the public and listen to any other public speeches, he must leave the room prior to the item being presented and debated. The Monitoring Officer stated that his advice had not changed, in that he considered if Councillor Leal-Bennett was present for the debate he was potentially breaching the Code of Conduct. As the decision before Council was a financial one, the Monitoring Officer advised that he would be failing in his duty if he did not raise concerns at a Member taking part in that decision, potentially in breach of the Code of Conduct. This would put any Council decision at risk. He therefore advised that Councillor Leal-Bennett should be asked to leave the Council Chamber for this item. The Chairman of the Council asked Councillor Leal-Bennett if he was prepared to accede to the advice of the Monitoring Officer and leave the room. Councillor Leal-Bennett replied that he had obtained his own advice regarding this matter, and stated that he was not prepared to leave the room. Accordingly, the Chairman of the Council suspended the meeting at 10.10pm, and withdrew from the Council Chamber. The Chairman of the Council returned to the Council Chamber at 10.24pm and re-opened the meeting. She announced that, in view of Councillor Leal-Bennett's decision not to withdraw from the meeting, she had withdrawn this item from consideration at the meeting. |
Not Agreed | ||
| 74 |
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS Report There were no questions from Members. |
Noted | ||
| 75 |
NOTICE OF MOTIONS Report Potential new settlement - North Hertfordshire Local Plan Due notice having been given in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.12, it was moved by Councillor S.K. Jarvis, and seconded by Councillor Sal Jarvis, "That Council notes the emerging local support for a potential new settlement to meet North Herts' longer term housing needs, including the support of the District's MPs. It therefore instructs officers to prepare a viable proposal for a new settlement so that the Council can consider this as an option when reviewing the results of the current local plan preferred options consultation later this year." As an amendment, it was moved by Councillor David Levett, and seconded by Councillor Ian Mantle, "That Council notes the suggestion from the Members of Parliament for North Hertfordshire and others that a new Garden City should be considered to meet the long term housing needs of North Hertfordshire. That Council instructs officers to continue to explore the long term housing needs of North Hertfordshire with other Local Authorities, the DCLG, and other relevant bodies, and the extent to which there may be reasonable options for new settlements for the future in North Hertfordshire together with the required infrastructure and funding. That Council asks that the Members of Parliament for North Hertfordshire positively endorse and assist North Hertfordshire District Council with any approach it may make to further such alternatives to the Secretary of State, the relevant Ministers and the Department of Communities and Local Government." Following debate, and upon being put to the vote, the amendment was carried. Following further debate upon the substantive motion, and upon being out to the vote, it was RESOLVED: That Council notes the suggestion from the Members of Parliament for North Hertfordshire and others that a new Garden City should be considered to meet the long term housing needs of North Hertfordshire. That Council instructs officers to continue to explore the long term housing needs of North Hertfordshire with other Local Authorities, the DCLG, and other relevant bodies, and the extent to which there may be reasonable options for new settlements for the future in North Hertfordshire together with the required infrastructure and funding. That Council asks that the Members of Parliament for North Hertfordshire positively endorse and assist North Hertfordshire District Council with any approach it may make to further such alternatives to the Secretary of State, the relevant Ministers and the Department of Communities and Local Government. |
Agreed | ||