Agenda and minutes

To confirm and sign the minutes of 17 January 2019.

The minutes of the extraordinary meeting of 17 January 2019 were confirmed and signed.

For information only.

Councillor Mrs Mayor drew members’ attention to the civic activities undertaken by herself and the Vice Chairman in the weeks preceding full council. 

Councillor Mrs Mayor thanked members who attended the Twinning Association Annual General Meeting and Tea Party which took place on 23^rd January. The event was well received with several new members attending.

Councillor Mrs Mayor drew members’ attention to the recommendation in relation to Council Tax that has been proposed by Cabinet following their meeting earlier today. The recommendations in front of members in hard copy form affect the Corporate Budget 2019 and Mid-term financial strategy report. It is this updated recommendation from Cabinet that members will be asked to consider this afternoon and the original recommendations in the published report are therefore substituted with these updated recommendations from Cabinet. Members will also be asked to consider the aspects of the report that this amendment will affect. 

No questions had been submitted under Procedure Rule 8.6 and Councillor Booth, as leader of the main opposition group, asked questions under Procedure Rule 8.4 as follows:

·       Councillor Booth asked for an update on the 11-12 High Street, Wisbech project. Councillor Seaton advised that a full update on the project was included in the report recently tabled at Overview &Scrutiny on 18 February titled ‘Progress in Delivering the Environment Corporate Objectives’. However, he advised the owner of these derelict properties has acknowledged they were unable to progress an application and redevelopment scheme and the project team has been working hard to ensure FDC does not lose the opportunity to address this site under the scheme and lose the significant HLF grant available. With the assistance of shared Peterborough City Council legal services and with members support, the purchase of the site was negotiated with the owner and completion occurred at the end of January 2019. In parallel with the acquisition work, officers have been looking at options for redevelopment of the site, including detailed engagement with the previously identified potential developer, as well as outlining alternative plans should this not progress to the satisfaction of all involved. The intended developer has now received all relevant details of the buildings along with the Council’s preferred transfer legal arrangement which will involve FDC retaining the property with a sole build lease to the developer on which the site will transfer to the developer on completion of works and grant draw down. The developer is in the process of forwarding financial data and works programme and the Council is preparing the legal build lease documentation. Once agreements are in place, updates will be provided to members and posted on the High Street website, which contains regular updates whereby members can follow progress on the overall HLF project. 

·       Councillor Booth thanked Councillor Seaton for the information and asked if the Combined Authority (CA) is involved? Councillor Seaton stated the only involvement it has is in acting as a safeguard in that if, for any reason, the developer should not be able to complete the development, we have a commitment from the CA to fund the remaining part of the development to completion.   

·       Councillor Booth asked for an update on the purchasing of new equipment for council meetings, are we still hiring equipment, such as the audio system, and what expenditure has been incurred to date? Councillor Seaton replied that the Council is in the process of procuring new AV equipment for use at Council meetings and aim to have the new equipment in place by the next Council meeting on 23 May. Meanwhile, equipment is still currently being hired at a cost of approximately £1657 per Council meeting and the total cost of hiring AV equipment to date is around £13k. He suggested, for a more detailed explanation, this question should be asked of the Portfolio Holder at portfolio holder questions. 

·       Councillor Booth referred to a recent report on recycling on BBC Look East  ...  view the full minutes text for item C58/18

Standing orders were suspended to allow for full discussion on this item.

Members asked questions of Portfolio Holders in accordance with Procedure Rules 8.1 and 8.2 as follows:

·       Councillor French asked Councillor Murphy what is happening with the river in March whereby a number of boats continue to overstay their mooring times, frustrating local residents, and how the situation will be resolved, acknowledging that one side is the responsibility of Middle Level and the other side the responsibility of the Council. Councillor Murphy responded that the Council now has a scheme in place to issue penalties to those who stay longer than 48 hours at our moorings and with more boaters mooring in the better weather, formal monitoring will now take place, with those in contravention of the limit being issued with a fixed penalty notice. Unfortunately, some boaters then move to the opposite bank which is not subject to our scheme. He added that the Council is liaising with Middle Level regarding this practice to prevent it occurring and the Council will also investigate Council Tax evasion with these boat owners. Middle Level has recently taken a bill through Parliament to give them more power regarding our waterways and once a formal structure is put in place, they will be able to insist that boat owners are correctly registered and have insurance and a safety certificate. He feels that with these additional powers, fixed penalty notices will be easier to enforce and this should improve the management of the mooring spaces in March Town Centre.

·       Councillor Mrs Bligh asked Councillor Seaton if, in respect of his position on the Combined Authority (CA), he could provide an update on bus routes. Councillor Seaton confirmed that the CA is currently undertaking a strategic bus review and his understanding is that both the CA and County Council have extended funding for the routes, how long for he is not sure but he will clarify that.

·       Councillor Booth asked how much the audio equipment has cost to date and, although he appreciates the procurement process has to be followed, why is it taking so long to get the new equipment? Councillor Buckton advised he will get back to Councillor Booth on costs as he does not have this information to hand. However, the new equipment will be in place for the first meeting of the new Council in May.

·       Councillor Tierney asked Councillor Buckton how the search is progressing for a new location for the Wisbech Bowls Club. Councillor Buckton advised he has met with the committee and they are liaising with Living Sport to identify alternative venues. One location in Long Sutton was found not to be viable, so they are continuing to look at premises nearer. Help is being given to give the club charitable status which will help with funding, so it is still a work in progress.

·       Councillor Butcher referred to the Surplus Asset Disposal Programme, making the point that he sits on the Staff Committee, but was not  ...  view the full minutes text for item C59/18

For Council to consider and approve the Final Business Plan 2019-2020.

Members considered the Final Business Plan 2018-19 Report presented by Councillor Seaton.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·       Councillor Boden thanked the Leader and officers concerned for the tracked changes; it was useful to see how the suggestions made at Overview & Scrutiny have come through to the final report. He is also grateful for the emphasis given to the Combined Authority (CA) both in the report and the Leader’s speech. It is increasingly clear that the Council has to look to align its priorities with the CA so that it can get the maximum advantage out of the far greater funding which is available in the CA than from any other source open to us.

·       Councillor Boden also raised that, with regards to the promotion of health and wellbeing, the second bullet point in the report mentioned working with partners to reduce health inequalities in the district. He stated that it is more important to reduce the health inequalities between our district and the rest of Cambridgeshire and asked the Leader if he would agree to add that to the objectives? Councillor Seaton thanked Councillor Boden and said he would reflect on that recommendation for the report.

·       Councillor Connor said that Councillor Seaton’s address failed to mention the £16.4m funds from the CA to address the shortfall of funding for Kings Dyke Crossing and there was no mention the £50k given to the three market towns of March, Whittlesey and Chatteris. Councillor Seaton added that £50k was also obtained for Wisbech and he agreed that Councillor Connor was correct, he had not stated that the money has been and is being provided by the CA to assist in projects that will help make Fenland a more prosperous place.

·       Councillor Booth stated that at Overview & Scrutiny meeting he had raised that the performance indicators were not fit for purpose, the report claims that they have been amended but looking at the tracked changes, the only change is that ‘Freedom’ has been added to the front of leisure centres, everything else is the same. He is disappointed that despite assurances that this would be looked at, no real changes have been made. Some of these performance indicators do not measure what the Council is trying to deliver so how do we know if we are successful or not? Councillor Seaton replied that this is a living document; changes can be made as we go along.

·       Councillor Miscandlon thanked the Leader for the CA’s input into building development in the Fenland area where they have contributed towards affordable housing and he thanked all those involved with that project.

Proposed by Councillor Connor, seconded by Councillor Hay and AGREED to approve the Final Business Plan 2018-19. 

To consider the Cabinet recommendations in relation to:

·       the General Fund Budget Estimates 2019/20 and the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2019/20 to 2023/24;

·       the Council Tax levels for 2019/20;

·       the Capital Programme 2019-2022;

·       the Treasury Management, Capital Strategy and Investment Strategy for 2019/20.

Members considered the Corporate Budget 2018 and Mid Term Financial Strategy report presented by Councillor Hay.  

Members were reminded that they were debating and voting on the altered recommendations which gave the option to either set Council Tax with a 1.97% increase [option ix (a)] or alternatively a 0% increase for this financial year [option ix (b)]. 

Members asked questions and made comments as follows:

·       Councillor Hay stated her belief is that members would be doing this Council a disservice by supporting a 0% increase, as even with a 1.97% increase there would be a deficit in 2019/20 of £553k which will rise should 0% be supported. She feels there are a number of risks, such as the new homes bonus and fairer funding review and any new administration after May will face the prospect of having to go through a second comprehensive spending review to present a balanced budget for 2020/21.

·       Councillor Tierney respected the way Councillor Hay had made her case but he held a different view. He said Overview & Scrutiny had looked at the budget and under-spend over recent years and it is broadly their view that there is no need at this time to raise Council Tax. He acknowledged that there are potential risks in the future, but members are not here to do the easy thing, but to do the right thing. There are many people in the area who are already struggling with their bills and feel they are paying enough Council Tax, and there is a very clear case economically through good financial management. If Council Tax is frozen this year, it will be appreciated by the public. 

·       Councillor Boden agreed with Councillor Tierney’s comments stating that members have to bear in mind that 2% increase in Council Tax costs our taxpayers an additional £150k approximately and whilst services which are provided have to be paid for, the Council has been asking for Council Tax increases for a number of years at a time when year-on-year we have been showing a surplus. Taking the last five years cumulatively, each year on average the Council has ended up at the end of the year with a surplus of £870k, which suggests that we have not become as tight in our financial planning as we should be. Councillor Hay made reference to failing to raise council tax by 2% this year will require the need to have a second comprehensive spending review next year but regardless of what the Council Tax increase may or may not be, we should be doing that anyway. The Council needs to continue to review what it does and look for additional savings to transform the way it delivers services to its residents. There is a culture of ultra-caution in this Council, proven by the level of surplus generated over the last five years and the problem with underspending by such a vast amount is that when members are making decisions, they are being made on a false premise. It  ...  view the full minutes text for item C61/18

To consider and pass the resolution to set the Council Tax requirement.

Following Council’s approval of a 0% Council Tax increase for 2019/20, a revised Council Tax resolution report was circulated to members.

Members considered the revised Council Tax Resolution Report presented by Councillor Hay.

Councillor Booth commented that in light of what has just been agreed, with a surplus of £100k, we need to make sure that we use that to offset any potential increase next year instead of going into reserves.

Proposed by Councillor Booth, seconded by Councillor Sutton and AGREED to pass the resolution set out in the revised report as follows:

·       To approve the Council Tax Resolution as amended to reflect a 0% Council Tax increase for Fenland District Council for 2019/20.

The Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014 impose an obligation on Local Authorities (after 25 February 2014) to record all votes on decisions on budget and council tax, with this in mind Members voted on this item as follows:

In favour of the proposal - Councillors Benney, Mrs Bligh, Boden, Booth, Buckton, Butcher, J Clark, S Clark, Connor, Cornwell, Court, Mrs Cox, Mrs Davis, Mrs French, Garratt, Hay, Miss Hoy, Mrs Laws, Mason, Miscandlon, Murphy, Oliver, Owen, Seaton, Sutton, Tierney, Yeulett

Against the proposal – None

Abstentions - None

The purpose of the report is to advise Members of the need to consider a review of the Fenland Local Plan (FLP).

Members considered the Fenland Local Plan Review and Update report presented by Councillor Mrs Laws.

Members asked questions and made comments as follows:

·       Councillor Owen stated that in terms of a shared service with Peterborough, they should be aware that this is a Fenland plan for the benefit of Fenland and not for the benefit of any other authority area. 

·       Councillor Mrs French stated that this plan, started in 2007, was supposed to be a fluid document but this has not been the case. She hopes that the plans of any Town or Parish Council will be taken seriously.  March had theirs adopted and approved but planning applications are coming in that officers are not taking seriously and this has got to stop.

·       Councillor Booth asked what would happen to the neighbourhood plans. They cannot go against a local plan but if it changes so dramatically, will they have to be started again?

·       Councillor Mrs Laws assured Councillor Owen that she accepted his comments and agreed that this is very much a plan for Fenland; also an important part of the consultation process is to go out to Town and Parish Councils. She added that she understood the comments made by Councillor Mrs French and also agreed that Councillor Booth was correct, any drastic difference to the plans would mean they would have to be started again. A neighbourhood plan works in conjunction with the local plan so members must look at what the community wants to put forward, but the local plan takes priority. However, although there may be a slight variation, community minds would likely have the same objective. 

·       Councillor Booth mentioned that a workshop was held after the PAS report, which is not referenced in the report. One idea was for a working party on the local plan, and he hopes this will be taken forward. Nick Harding, Head of Planning, said as a consequence of reviewing the local plan some elements of the neighbourhood plan are already in place which will fall by the wayside. There is more emphasis on national planning policies. 

·       Councillor Boden was happy to support the proposal put forward by Councillor Mrs Laws but it is not just a matter of producing a new local plan, which will reflect changes in national policy. He said members need to look at the existing local plan, recognise the areas where it has not been successful, learn from it and aim to do better.  The desire is for innovative change and a look at other local authority changes. 

·       Councillor Connor asked how a lack of five-year land supply could affect the new local plan. Councillor Mrs Laws explained that a comprehensive document would be coming out in March.   

·       Councillor Sutton stated he supports the updated local plan but would like to use the planning process to help make the villages sustainable.

·       Councillor Mrs Laws advised that there are some shortcomings in the local plan but the consultation process is key.  Members can learn, involve  ...  view the full minutes text for item C63/18

The purpose of this report is for Council to adopt the Senior Manager Pay Policy Statement for 2019/20 attached to the report.

Members considered the Senior Manager Pay Policy Statement Report presented by Councillor Hay.

Members asked questions and made comments as follows:

·       Councillor Booth recalled many years ago that there was going to be an investigation into the returning officer fees as it was felt archaic to pay a fee for what is essentially a service provided by the Council, particularly when councils are having to cut budgets. There could potentially be a saving here and should the Council not write to the local government minister regarding this?

·       Councillor Sutton addressed the monitoring officer and asked what would happen if members do not agree with this pay rise today?  The response of the Monitoring Officer was that if Council were unable to come to agreement today, there would have to be an Extraordinary Council Meeting held before 1^st April.

·       Councillor Boden stated that he was under the impression that in the case of parliamentary elections, all monies are reimbursed by central government so there is no cost to the local Council. He said that Councillor Hay had admirably laid out the legislative background but did she believe the outcomes from the pay structure throughout the Council are good? Councillor Hay advised that it was entirely appropriate.

·       Councillor Sutton said there has been a lot in the press about the Chief Executive’s pay in correlation to that of the Prime Minister. He feels this is unfair because it could equally be argued that the Prime Minister is underpaid.  As this comes up every year he wonders if members could perhaps hold an independent review and Council come back to consider the outcome. The monitoring officer advised there is not the time to carry out a review before 1^st April.

·       Councillor Owen reminded members that pay is based on responsibility. Carrying out elections is highly responsible, therefore that is reflected in the pay.

·       Councillor Hay pointed out that the Chief Executive’s pay is slightly misleading as it also includes the car allowance. Also, the pay was set by the previous leader and was well below that of his predecessor. Since then the only increases are the nationally agreed cost of living rises. 

·       Councillor Booth said, in relation to Councillor Sutton’s point, there is a difference between having a policy and a contract of employment. This is just a policy that we follow going forward to set a salary.

·       Councillor Miss Hoy said she initially felt the pay was too high but, having realised that it is a big responsibility and a legally binding one, she understands why the pay is as high as it is. The public do have a perception of the payment being too high but, as Councillor Booth said, this is a policy not a wage negotiation.  

Proposed by Councillor Owen, seconded by Councillor Seaton and AGREED to adopt the Senor Manager Pay Policy Statement for 2019/20 at appendix 1 of the Report as required by the Localism Act 2011.  

(Councillor Garratt left the meeting at 5.50pm and  ...  view the full minutes text for item C64/18