Issue - meetings

REPORT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SERVICES MANAGER

To consider and agree the Draft Proposals for the second stage of public consultation of the Community Governance Review.

RESOLVED: That Council:

(1)   Noted the outcome of the first stage consultation.

(2)   Agreed the Draft Proposals for the Community Governance Review, launching a public consultation on these [note that the Final Recommendations will be considered at a future Council meeting, taking the results of the public consultation into account] to subject to the following amendments:

i     Letchworth:

       ii.  That the proposed number of councillors for parishes with fewer than 500

            electors be reduced from 7 to 5.

(3)   Noted that hard-copy leaflets will be distributed to households in areas where external parish boundaries are proposed to be moved, new parish councils established, or new parish wards implemented.

REASON FOR DECISIONS: The Council is required to keep parish electoral arrangements under review. Following the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) review of district electoral arrangements (Council size and warding patterns), it is necessary to review parish arrangements across the district to bring them into alignment, ensure they remain fit for purpose, and to ensure they continue to reflect local needs. This report provides Draft Proposals following the first round of public consultation. Before Final Recommendations can be developed and considered, there must be a public consultation on the Draft Proposals, the responses to which will be taken into account in forming the Final Recommendations.

Audio recording – 5 minutes 46 seconds

Richard Beesley, a Consultant working for the Council, presented the report entitled ‘Community Governance Review – Draft Proposals for Public Consultation’ and advised that:

·       The Council was undertaking a Community Governance Review (CGR) of parish electoral arrangements.

·       The results from the first stage of public consultation had been used to develop a number of draft proposals.

·       Once these draft proposals were approved by Council, a second round of public consultation would begin. Responses to the second round of public consultation would be used to develop the final recommendations which would come back to Council later in the year for consideration and implementation.

·       This paper set out the background and legislative considerations, but nothing has been finalised at this stage.

·       It was important to hear the views of local people, parish and town councils throughout the consultation.

·       Part of the proposal was to change the electoral cycle to move parish and town council elections in line with North Herts Council elections.

·       Another part was to amend the number of parish and town councillors as set out in paragraph 8.10 of the report.

·       It was proposed to adjust several external parish boundaries and to create new town councils in Baldock and Hitchin.

·       It was proposed to adjust internal parish ward boundaries to align with North Herts Council wards in Royston and to create of new parish ward in Ickleford.

·       Leaflets would be distributed to households in areas affected by any proposed changes to ensure awareness of public consultations. This would start slightly later on 14 March 2025.

Following a question from Councillor Clare Strong, the Consultant advised that parish council elections could still be changed if required following the English Devolution White Paper.

Councillor Emma Fernandes proposed an amendment to recommendation 2.2 for a draft proposal for a parish and town council for Letchworth, subject to consultation with residents, with wards to align to the district wards. Councillor Nigel Mason seconded the amendment.

The following Members took part in the debate on the amendment: 

·       Councillor Ian Mantle

·       Councillor Ralph Muncer

·       Councillor David Chalmers

·       Councillor Claire Strong

·       Councillor Sean Nolan

·       Councillor Sean Prendergast

·       Councillor Nigel Mason

·       Councillor Alistair Willoughby

·       Councillor Tina Bhartwas

·       Councillor Daniel Allen

Points raised during the debate included:

·       There had been an unsuccessful attempt in the past to create a parish for Letchworth due to the results of consultation with local residents.

·       Due to the uncertainty in the future of the Council following the English Devolution White Paper it was important to ensure that Letchworth was not left without a town council.

·       The residents of Letchworth should be given the opportunity to discuss and offer their opinions before a decision of creating a parish and new town council was decided.

·       There were concerns of the costs involved and whether it was the right time for this to happen with the uncertainty of the future of the Council.

·       The number of councillor seats per ward could be determined at a later stage in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PAID SERVICE

This report sets out proposed changes to the structure of the Council’s Leadership Team and Senior Management, to create additional capacity to support the delivery of the Council Plan whilst also ensuring staff are supported, work is delivered, and strategic leadership is provided.

RESOLVED: That Council:

(1)   Approved the ongoing additional budget of £112k per year for inclusion in the Budget 2025/26 (Revenue Budget and Investment Strategy).

(2)   Noted the proposed Leadership Team and Senior Management arrangements as set out in the report and the proposed timetable for the implementation of these arrangements.

(3)   Waived the constitutional requirements for the appoint of a Director, in this instance, and authorise the Head of Paid Service to offer the new role of Director - Regulatory to the current Service Director Housing and Environmental Health.

(4)   Authorised the Monitoring Officer and Chief Finance Officer to make the necessary amendments to the Council’s Constitution (including the Contract Procurement Rules and Financial Regulations) and any consequential title changes to other Policy and Procedure documentation, to reflect the new Leadership Team and Senior Management arrangements.             

REASON FOR DECISIONS: To ensure that the Council has a Leadership Team and Senior Management structure that is fit for purpose and is able to deliver the Council’s priorities. The proposed structure also responds to one of the recommendations in the Corporate Peer Challenge report.

Audio recording – 48 minutes 50 seconds

N.B. The Service Director – Resources and the Service Director – Legal and Community moved to the public gallery for this item.

The Managing Director presented the report entitled ‘Leadership Team and Senior Management Restructure’ and advised:

·       This was a very thorough report and was self-explanatory.

·       The proposals in the report have been developed over several years.

·       This proposal was supported by the findings of the LGA Corporate Peer Challenge who had stated that the leadership team should be increased to ensure sufficient strategic leadership capacity and effective deliverance of services.

·       The current leadership team at North Hertfordshire District Council was smaller and cheaper than other similar councils.

·       The Council had been operating with this temporary structure for 18 months and a difference in delivery had been seen.

·       Having a seventh director had created capacity for the other directors to dedicate to other areas.

·       A number of options had been considered and these were all detailed in the report.

·       The post of the ‘Managing Director’ was to be renamed to ‘Chief Executive’ and the posts of ‘Service Director’ renamed ‘Director’.

·       Descriptions of each position could be found in paragraphs 8.2-8.10 of the report.

·       Staff had engaged positively and constructively to the consultation and feedback has been incorporated into this proposal where possible. The proposal had changed from start of consultation to what was presented to Council.

·       If approved, the seventh director position and new structure would start from the beginning of the new financial year, 1 April 2025.

The following Members asked questions:

·       Councillor Claire Strong

·       Councillor Joe Graziano

·       Councillor Ralph Muncer

·       Councillor Martin Prescott

·       Councillor David Barnard

·       Councillor Daniel Allen

In response to questions, the Managing Director advised that:

·       Local government was a completely different sector to retail and division of budget and headcount did not equate to equality of responsibilities.

·       The post of one of the directors was part time for 30 hours a week and savings from this had already been allocated elsewhere within the staffing budget.

·       The best outcome for the Council would be to retain the individual who has been in the role on a temporary basis.

·       Two service directors would be retiring over the next few months and retaining this individual would help to ensure the stability of the Council.

·       The timeline for recruiting a new individual would be approximately 2-3 months from start to finish, plus any notice period.

·       An individual transferring from another local authority would be able to retain continuous service benefits.

·       The LGA Corporate Peer Challenge identified that the current leadership team was stretched and a permanent position of a seventh director would provide additional capacity.

Councillor Ruth Brown proposed an amendment to recommendation 2.1 that the additional budget of £112k per year was for 2 years only. Councillor Paul Ward seconded the amendment.

The following Members took part in the debate on the amendment:

·       Councillor Sadie Billing

·       Councillor Alistair Willoughby

·       Councillor Sean Nolan

·       Councillor Paul Ward

·       Councillor Nigel Mason

·       Councillor Daniel Allen  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95