Agenda item

To consider any matters referred to the Committee for a decision in relation to a call-in of decision.

 

At the time of publication, one item had been accepted as a Call-In, under 6.3.11 of the Constitution, regarding the Cabinet decision taken on 11 February 2025 on Proposed Parking Tariffs for 2025/26.

 

Following agreement from the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee, it was agreed this item would be considered within this scheduled meeting, rather than as an extraordinary meeting.

The Chair advised that one item had been accepted as a Call-In, under 6.3.11 of the Constitution, regarding the Cabinet decision taken on 11 February 2025 on Proposed Parking Tariffs for 2025/26. The decision was called in by Councillors Ralph Muncer, Martin Prescott, Joe Graziano, Steven Patmore and David Barnard.

 

RECOMMENDED TO CABINET: That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee recommends that:

 

(1)     Cabinet reconsiders the proposed on-street and off-street charging tariffs in Royston and Knebworth in light of the information received at the meeting.

 

(2)     Cabinet considers the increase in parking charges based on the updated modelling, specifically around the 4% increase in charges, where this had not been applied to all charges.

 

(3)     Cabinet notes the importance of Overview & Scrutiny in supporting Cabinet in reaching robust policy decisions and works with the Chair of the Committee to effectively facilitate this.  

Audio recording – 8 minutes 52 seconds

 

Councillors Ralph Muncer, David Barnard and Martin Prescott presented the Called-In item from the Cabinet meeting on 11 February 2025 entitled ‘Proposed Parking Tariffs for 2025/26’ and advised that:

 

·             Councillors Joe Graziano and Steven Patmore were unable to attend this meeting.

·             Within the Budget announced in October 2024 by the government, National Insurance for Employers had been increased. This would directly impact local businesses and in turn employees who would be likely to see their wages reduced as a result of cost cutting measures by businesses. Because of this, North Herts residents would have less disposable income to spend in the district and town centres.

·             High streets had only recently recovered from significant economic events in recent times such as the COVID Pandemic and the Ukraine War.

·             The increase to National Insurance for Employers would be yet another significant economic challenge that would further hinder the recovery. 

·             The decision to increase car parking charges would add to the pressures and challenges which independent local businesses already faced from increasing business rates, rents, and inflation.

·             A 10p increase to parking charges in some car parks did not sound like a lot, however, it could mean the difference in people choosing to visit towns in North Herts and this could have a negative impact on local businesses if the parking charges decreased footfall in town centres.

·             Car parking charges across the district should be frozen in the 2025/26 financial year to support businesses who were already faced with multiple challenges as a result of the policies of the current Government.

·             The 30-minute tariff in Knebworth should be abolished to allow free parking for up to 30 minutes in the St Martin’s Road Car Park which would not only support local businesses on this road and in the High Street, but would alleviate current and future congestion pressures in the village ahead of approximately 600 proposed homes being built.

·             The proposed parking tariffs were not discussed by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee before Cabinet took the decision on them, and it was important for Members across North Herts Council to be able to scrutinise the decisions that the minority administration made.

·             The increase in car parking charges and the ongoing possibility of on-street charges would be a tax on rural communities who had limited or no access to public transport.

·             Rural shoppers were a major contributor to town centres and the increase to parking charges would be an unfair financial attack on them.

·             Increasing parking charges may encourage people to shop at bigger greenfield sites with free parking rather than town centres and high streets. 

·             The decision on increasing parking charges should be reconsidered and withdrawn if the right solution could not be found.

 

The following Members asked questions:

 

·             Councillor Elizabeth Dennis

·             Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason

·             Councillor Jon Clayden

·             Councillor Matt Barnes

 

In response to questions, Councillors Ralph Muncer, David Barnard and Martin Prescott advised that:

 

·             Statistics on the percentage of elderly and disabled residents that would be affected by the proposed increase to parking charges were not available at the time. However, these communities would certainly feel the impact of the proposed increases and this had been considered when calling in the item.

·             Specific studies on the effects of increased car parking charges could not be named at the time. However, other authorities had carried out studies and increasing car parking charges had been a detractor from town centres. For example, footfall in Harpenden Town Centre had decreased significantly because of the car parking charges that were implemented by St Albans City and District Council.

·             Encouraging footfall and supporting local businesses should be a priority for the Council.

·             Cabinet should have considered the economic circumstances of local businesses in the current climate when they made the decision.

·             As a scrutiny committee, they should be able to make recommendations for local communities and businesses and seek to support Cabinet in making decisions that would promote growth for the benefit of residents.

·             The increase had been debated at Cabinet in terms of the Medium-Term Financial Strategy. However, since then, developments had taken place in which the economy had not performed well and the budget had impacted local businesses. Therefore, the decision should be looked at within the scope of the new developments that had taken place.

·             They were supportive of Knebworth Parish Council and Royston Town Council progressing discussions with North Herts Council on 30-minutes free parking in St Martin’s Car Park in Knebworth and the Free After Three scheme in Royston respectively. However, they believed that North Herts Council had greater ability and resilience than both the Parish and Town Councils to freeze car parking charges, and therefore North Herts Council should freeze them to allow the Parish and Town Councils to spend money elsewhere on benefiting their communities in other areas.

·             One of the benefits of calling in the item for discussion at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee was that Members of all political parties across the Council had a chance to give their input on the issue.

·             Businesses needed support immediately rather than one year from now.

 

Councillor Val Bryant, as Deputy Leader of the Council, provided a response and advised that:

 

·             The proposed increase to parking charges was the lowest sensible inflationary amount in order to try and minimise the effects on local businesses.

·             The effect of parking charges was anecdotal and there was no data on the effect that increased parking charges had on local businesses. Hitchin Town BID had not provided any figures for this during the consultation process, but this may be something that needed looking at.

·             As a resident of North Herts who used public transport, she thought that the small increase to parking charges would not make a difference to residents living in rural areas.

·             Data collection on the effects of increased parking charges on rural residents was not available but should be looked at in the future.

 

The Service Director – Regulatory provided a response and advised that:

 

·             Proposed increases were on existing parking tariffs, there were no proposals for additional tariffs outside of those that already existed.

·             Area Forums and Business Improvement Districts had been consulted, representing both a scrutiny and economic development perspective when considering increased parking charges and they had provided responses to the proposals. 

·             Royston First BID had proposed an amendment to the original proposed tariff increases and this had been adopted by the Cabinet in its decision.

·             A productive meeting with Royston Town Council and Royston First BID had taken place earlier that day and subject to their approval processes they would likely be putting forward a funding option to seek to continue the Free After Three scheme. They were also supportive of the new parking machines which required car park users to ‘tap in’ and ‘tap out’ as they needed to understand whether the scheme would meet their aspirations in the future.

·             Knebworth were still looking to subsidise the 30-minutes free parking in St Martin’s Car Park.

 

The following Members asked questions:

 

·             Councillor Jon Clayden

·             Councillor Elizabeth Dennis

·             Councillor Martin Prescott

·             Councillor Ralph Muncer

 

In response to questions, the Service Director – Regulatory advised that:

 

·             Royston Town Council had likely taken the decision to seek to continue the Free After Three scheme with St Mary’s Primary School in mind as there was limited parking at the school itself.

·             By asking people to tap in and tap out of car parks, they would be able to track data on footfall and inform the Town Council and BID of the impact of their funding dedicated to the scheme in the future.

 

In response to questions, the Service Director – Resources advised that:

 

·             There was no evidence to suggest that increasing parking charges resulted in a drop in revenue immediately after, or in the financial year when the increases were announced.

·             There was an error on Appendix A where the higher tariff proposals were not in line with the inflationary increase. These would be recalculated and put into the figures to be considered by Cabinet.

 

In response to questions, the Strategic Planning & Projects Manager advised that the inflationary changes were rounded to the nearest 10p as they had moved away from 5p increases in the past.

 

In response to questions, Councillor Val Bryant advised that:

 

·             From her experience, car parks in Hitchin were at maximum capacity after 3pm daily.

·             Knebworth Parish Council had made no comments on the increase in parking tariffs, they simply wished to keep the 30-minutes free parking in St Martin’s Road Car Park.

 

Councillor Ian Albert, as Executive Member for Finance and IT advised that:

 

·             There had been no increase to season tickets for car parks in North Herts.

·             The Town Centre Manager for Hitchin raised a number of concerns about any future Sunday parking and evening charges, but not around the proposed increase to existing tariffs.

 

Councillor Ralph Muncer highlighted that in order to abolish the 30-minute tariff in St Martin’s Car Park in Knebworth, it would cost £3,000 annually.

 

Councillor Ralph Muncer proposed, and Councillor Martin Prescott seconded the following recommendation to Cabinet:

 

(1)     That Cabinet should freeze parking charges in the 2025/26 Financial Year.

 

(2)     That Cabinet should remove the 30-minute parking charge in St Martin’s Road Car Park, Knebworth.

 

The following Members took part in the debate:

 

·             Councillor Ralph Muncer

·             Councillor Elizabeth Dennis

·             Councillor Matt Barnes

 

The following points were raised as part of the debate:

 

·             The measure to freeze parking charges would aim to support local businesses who would face challenges presented by the increase to National Insurance.

·             The proposed parking charges could have been debated at a previous Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting to avoid the call in process altogether, however the discussion that had taken place at the meeting today had been valuable and Cabinet should note the importance of Overview and Scrutiny in helping it to reach robust policy decisions.

·             The consultation with the relevant BIDs and Area Forums had been extensive and the agenda for recent Overview and Scrutiny Committee meetings had been lengthy, hence why it had not been brought to the Committee before it went to Cabinet. 

 

Councillor Matt Barnes proposed the amendment, and these were seconded by Councillor Tom Tyson, as follows:

 

(1)     Remove the consideration to freeze parking charges in the 2025/26 Financial Year.

 

(2)     Replace the recommendation to remove the 30-minute parking charge in St Martin’s Road Car Park, Knebworth with an amendment for Cabinet to reconsider proposed on-street and off-street charging tariffs in Royston and Knebworth in light of the information received at the meeting.

 

(3)     That Cabinet considers the increase in parking charges based on the updated modelling, specifically around the 4% increase in charges, where this had not been applied to all charges.

 

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

 

·             Councillor Jon Clayden

·             Councillor Ralph Muncer

·             Councillor Tom Tyson

 

The following points were raised as part of the debate on the amendment:

 

·             It made sense for Cabinet to reconsider the increase to all parking tariffs by the inflationary rate of 4% in light of the recalculation that would need to be made to the higher tariff charges.

·             Knebworth and Royston were very different communities and considering them together in the proposal would not be helpful.

·             Cabinet would consider each area individually in detail when making a decision on funding for parking schemes.

 

Following a vote, the amendments were CARRIED.

 

Councillor Elizabeth Dennis proposed an amendment to be included in the motion that Cabinet notes the importance of Overview and Scrutiny in supporting Cabinet in reaching robust policy decisions and works with the Chair of the Committee to effectively facilitate this.

 

Councillor Ralph Muncer accepted the amendment into the substantive motion. This was also accepted by Councillor Martin Prescott as seconder. 

 

Councillor Ralph Muncer took part in the debate on the substantive motion and highlighted his concern with the amendments made as they did not support the removal of the 30-minute tariff charge in St Martin’s Car Park.

 

VOTE TOTALS:

 

YES                 :           7

ABSTAIN        :           2

NO                  :           2

TOTAL            :           11

 

THE INDIVIDUAL RESULTS WERE AS FOLLOWS:

 

Cllr Matt Barnes                                             YES

Cllr Jon Clayden                                             YES

Cllr Elizabeth Dennis                                     YES

Cllr Ralph Muncer                                          ABSTAIN

Cllr Louise Peace                                           YES

Cllr Martin Prescott                                        ABSTAIN

Cllr Tom Tyson                                               YES

Cllr Laura Williams                                         YES

Cllr Claire Winchester                                    YES

Cllr Donna Wright                                           NO

Cllr Daniel Wright-Mason                               NO

 

RECOMMENDED TO CABINET:That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee recommends that:

 

(1)       Cabinet reconsiders the proposed on-street and off-street charging tariffs in Royston and Knebworth in light of the information received at the meeting.

 

(2)       Cabinet considers the increase in parking charges based on the updated modelling, specifically around the 4% increase in charges, where this had not been applied to all charges.

 

(3)       Cabinet notes the importance of Overview and Scrutiny in supporting Cabinet in reaching robust policy decisions and works with the Chair of the Committee to effectively facilitate this.