Council Minutes: 21 July 2011

Present:

Cl/38/7/11 Apologies for Absence

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors T Ladhams and A Connell. Members wished Councillor Connell a speedy recovery from his recent surgery.

Cl/39/7/11 Declarations of Interest

Councillor K Morgan declared a personal interest in item 8 on the agenda, the motion on notice, in that he was a Member of the Cumbria Association of Local Councils (CALC) which was committed to the establishment of a Town Council in Penrith.

Cl/40/7/11 Minutes

Minutes Cl/18/6/11 to Cl/37/6/11 of the meeting of this Committee held on 16 June 2011were approved as a correct record of those proceedings.

Cl/41/7/11 Chairman’s Remarks

The Chairman made the following announcements:

I was delighted on Tuesday, to welcome Parliamentary Under Secretary, Andrew Stunell MP to my home ward of Crosby Ravensworth, in the week Eden celebrates the first anniversary of becoming a Big Society Vanguard area. Andrew Stunell saw the first bricks being laid as building work starts on our community’s housing scheme. The MP also saw work progressing on the Butcher’s Arms, the pub purchased through a community shares initiative.

We all know the phrase ‘taking coal to Newcastle’, well last week Sky TV Programme Monster Munchies made giant Sticky Toffee Puddings on the shores of Lake Ullswater. Fantastic fun was had by the teams competing to make this most tasty of Eden fayre, with chefs from Sharrow Bay and the Glenridding Hotel lending a hand.

The Lakes Free Range Egg Company held an excellent open day last week, showing off their new business premises at Stainton, near Penrith. The company promotes sustainable farming and supplies big name companies such as Morrisons and MacDonalds with their quality free range eggs. Company owners David and Helen Brass, are justifiably proud of the thriving family business they have created, which present a positive image for our local economy.

Another local company doing well is Sundog Energy, who has been awarded the contract to fit solar panels to Kings Cross Railway Station in London.

I would also like to congratulate the Eden based companies who were successful at the 2011 Cumbria Tourism Awards held on 7 July. The awards celebrate the best tourism businesses in Cumbria and recognise the hard work and talented individuals behind the scenes.

The Eden winners are:

Sheila Hensman Award for Outstanding Customer Service: David Hall, Ullswater Steamers

Taste of Cumbria Award: George and Dragon, near Penrith

Sustainable Tourism Award of the Year: Ullswater Steamers

Tourism event of the Year: Lakes Alive (included an event in Penrith)

On the sports front, Eden District’s team won the Cumbria School Olympics held at the Sands Centre in Carlisle on 5 July, so congratulations to all the young people who took part.

If you are looking for activities for your children this summer, Penrith Leisure Centre is the place to be. From the latest dance craze to the more sedate bowling rink, the Council and Parkwood Leisure have an activity programme for all ages, abilities and budgets. Visit our website for more information.

Entries are now open for the Penrith Triathlon which is being held on the August Bank Holiday weekend at Penrith Leisure Centre. Entries are welcome from individual athletes and teams, for more information visit our website.

Other events I have attended in recent weeks include the Alzheimer’s Society’s Memorial Walk at Hutton-in-the Forest, the Askham Bryan College Open Day, The Eden Community Alarms AGM, the re-launch of Ullswater Steamers Western Bell, the opening of a new play area at Great Strickland, a visit to the Town Hall by a group of young people from Connexions and Penrith Museum’s new exhibition Restoration of Penrith’s Coronation Garden.

Cl/42/7/11 Questions by the Public

No questions by the public had been received for this meeting.

Cl/43/7/11 Executive Report

The Leader presented report CE10/11 of the I Interim Chief Executive which provided an update on the activities of the Executive and Portfolio Holders since the last Council meeting on 16 June 2011.

The Portfolio Holders responded to questions from Members on the detail contained within the report.

RESOLVED that the report be noted

Cl/44/7/11 Questions by Members

There were eight questions by Members under rule 12 of the constitution.

1.   Councillor N Hughes had asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Resources.

‘Carlisle City council is said to be about to dispose of 52 pieces of land (list provided) to meet its current financial shortfall. Does the Portfolio holder still feel, on the basis of this evidence, that Carlisle CC is a suitable partner with which Eden DC should be sharing services?’

The Portfolio Holder for Resources had provided the following response:

It is a matter for the Council to decide whether it wishes to share services with Carlisle City Council or any other local authority. Any decision will be made taking account of all relevant issues.

I would point out that this Council has considered its own portfolio of properties and those which it may wish to sell or retain. It is not unusual for any local authority to do this and in the light of financial circumstances.

The Council should act in the best interests of Eden and its residents in deciding whether to share services with any local authority.

2.   Councillor Hughes had asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Resources:

‘I understand that the council is to develop new means for communicating with residents. Does this mean that there will now no longer be any need for the expensive publication ‘Eye on Eden’?’

The Portfolio Holder for Resources had provided the following response:

The council uses very many ways to communicate with residents. Some are more cost effective than others and some information is required to be made available because it is statutory.

For several years now we have only produced one issue of Eye Eden per year, this goes out with C Tax bills and the Statutory Council tax information which council is legally bound to send out. When we are sending out the bills and the statutory information, we take the opportunity to add in some pages providing information on what the council has spent Council Tax money on and what it has achieved over the year, and this combined information is delivered to every household. The cost of providing the non statutory information in Eye on Eden is approximately £4,000 per year. This compares favourably with statutory notices in the local newspaper which can cost £950 per notice.

Note: For Eye on Eden the print and design costs are £7,500 in total, this includes the non statutory information and an accessible version for the website and the distribution (postage) costs are £7,000 in total (the bills have to be individually addressed and posted through letterboxes).

Councillor Hughes asked the following supplementary question of the Portfolio Holder:

‘It used to costs only £15,000 to put out two copies of ‘Eye on Eden’. Do you agree that it is not good value for money?’

The Portfolio Holder for Resources provided the following response:

We have a duty to provide the public with information. This Council has agreed that ‘Eye on Eden’ meets that function.

3.   Councillor Hughes had asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Resources:

‘When will Eden District Council repay the half a million pounds it borrowed to extend the less than fully used car park at Bluebell Lane, Penrith?’

The Portfolio Holder for Resources had provided the following response:

A business case for the extension to the car park at Bluebell Lane was considered by full Council on 27 November 2008. Council agreed to the extension. In addition a loan of £550,000 was agreed to fund the purchase of the land and the construction work. The loan is being repaid over 10 years and will be repaid by May 2019.

Councillor Hughes asked the following supplementary question of the Portfolio Holder for Resources:

It will take 8 years to repay the money, there will be significantly more parking in Penrith due to Booths and the New Squares developments. Do you feel that sufficient revenue is available to fund this?

The Portfolio Holder for Resources responded as follows:

Yes, the business case for the extension to the car park was considered and agreed by Council.

4.   Councillor Hughes had asked the following question of the Leader of the Council

Will the Leader resign if a merger with Carlisle city council does not take place?

The Leader had responded as follows:

The question of a merger between Eden DC and Carlisle City Council is not under consideration therefore there is no reason for me to resign on this issue. However I am very much aware that I am Leader of the Council with the consent of a majority of Members. It follows that if that consent were withdrawn, I would offer my resignation.

5.   Councillor Ms D Stobbart had asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

Will the Leader please make clear the position on whether Eden District Council are considering a merger with Carlisle City Council as reported in the press recently.

The Leader had responded as follows:

I refer Cllr Stobbart to my answer to Cllr Hughes. There are no proposals for Eden DC and Carlisle City Council to merge.

6.   Councillor M Eyles had asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

Last week the Scrutiny Coordinating Board had before it a draft business case for shared Revenue and Benefits management with South Lakeland Council. The document ran to 31 pages and included details of projected savings and analysed both the benefits and risks to both councils. Where is a similarly robust and comprehensive document to support the Leader’s recommendation to share a chief executive officer with Carlisle, which seems solely to be based on the imminent retirement of Carlisle’s present chief executive?

The Leader had responded as follows:

I believe that the question demonstrates a misunderstanding of the process for developing shared service and joint working arrangements between Councils. The paper that Councillor Eyles refers to is the product of many months of work by officers and decisions by Members as the various stages of the project were completed. In contrast the position regarding sharing a Chief Executive is in the initial stages.

The retirement of the Chief Executive and Town Clerk of Carlisle City Council was represented to members as an opportunity and it remains that.

The position on sharing a Chief Executive with Carlisle is that we now have resolutions from both Councils that authorise and will inform further discussions. Council has not made a definitive decision to share a Chief Executive with Carlisle and members will not do be asked to do so without a business case that will demonstrate that there are sound reasons for entering into a formal agreement.

Councillor Eyles asked the following supplementary question:

Why was a full risk report not presented to us in June?

The Leader responded as follows:

I believe that question was answered at the last meting.

7.   Councillor M Eyles had asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

In the leader’s report dated 14 April on sharing services and a chief exec with Carlisle City Council, his first principle was “a prospective long term partnership that would be robust regardless of political leadership and able to withstand changes in political leadership.” How robust would a partnership with Carlisle City Council be in light of the motion to Carlisle Council put forward by the leader of that council’s largest party, Councillor Doctor Hendry, seeking “an assurance that there will be no appointment of a shared Chief Executive or shared Management Team between Carlisle and Eden”?

The Leader had responded as follows:

The position adopted by opposition groups at Carlisle City Council is clearly a matter that must be considered. That is why, from day one, I have advocated that any agreement with a prospective partner for sharing services and joint working should be capable of surviving a change of political control in both Councils.

Cllr Eyles will be aware that the motion he refers to was defeated with the unanimous support of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Groups and the Independent members.

The implications of this decision will be considered in detail during forthcoming discussions.

Councillor Eyles asked the following supplementary question:

How many times have you met with Carlisle City Councillor Hendry in the last year and what does he think of the proposals.

The Leader responded as follows:

I have met Councillor Hendry on a number of occasions. We have not discussed the relationship of the two Councils. My links at a political level are with the Council Leader.

8.   Councillor M Eyles had asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

In his capacity as current chairman of the Vitality of Penrith Group, will the Leader tell me how much funding the group has received or has been promised in the last year and from which organisations?

The Leader had responded as follows:

I refer Cllr Eyles to the progress report on the Vitality of Penrith at item 12 on tonight’s agenda. This shows that Eden District Council has so far authorised expenditure of £160,000 and that a bid has been made for support to create a Business Improvement District in Penrith. If successful this will yield significant sums for investment in Vitality of Penrith projects.

Our Council is working with Penrith Chamber of Trade, Cumbria County Council and PACT on funding issues. It should also be noted that individuals in the town are giving significant amounts of their time as volunteers and this has great benefit for the project.

Councillor Eyles asked the following supplementary question of the Leader:

Which scrutiny panel is responsible for the Vitality of Penrith and when was the last time the group was looked at?

The Leader responded as follows:

The group comes under the remit of the Housing and Community Panel. Whether an issue is considered by the Panel is a matter for the Scrutiny Co-ordinating Board.

Cl/45/7/11 Motions on Notice

The following motion on notice had been received from Councillor M Eyles in accordance with rule 13 of the constitution:

‘As a result of a recent overwhelming show of demand at the Chamber of Trade meeting on 5 July, I move that this Council shall instruct officers to prepare a feasibility report on options to bring into being a Town Council for the Town of Penrith and bring the report to Council for debate and decision at the earliest opportunity.’

The motion was seconded by Councillor Ms D Stobbart.

Amendment by Councillor Nicolson that the words ‘instruct officers to prepare a feasibility report on options to bring into being’ be replaced with the words ‘request officers to bring forward proposals for action QC3 in the approved Corporate Plan regarding’ and that the words ‘and bring the report to Council for debate and decision at the earliest opportunity’ be removed.

With the consent of the proposer and seconder of the original motion this amendment was incorporated into the original motion and a vote was held and it was

RESOLVED that as a result of a recent overwhelming show of demand at the Chamber of Trade meeting on 5 July, this Council shall request officers to bring forward proposals for action QC3 in the approved Corporate Plan regarding a Town Council for the Town of Penrith.

Cl/46/7/11 Capital Expenditure 2010-2011 Outturn and Revised 2011-2012 Programme

Council considered report F61/11 of the Director of Finance which advised Members of: capital expenditure for the financial year 2010-11, together with the means by which it was funded; and presented an amended Capital Programme for 2011-12, to take account of a revision of projected resources and other factors affecting the Council’s Capital Programme and the impact of the 2010-11 outturn, subject to audit.

RESOLVED that

1.   the outturn for 2010-11, subject to audit, as set out in Appendix A to the report, be noted;

2.   the amended Programme for 2011-12, as set out in Appendix C to the report, be agreed;

3.   until over-commitment in the Programme is eliminated, no new schemes be included in the Programme, unless fully grant-funded, or emergency schemes; and

4.   any longstanding schemes within the revised Capital Programme be reviewed in the forthcoming estimate cycle.

Cl/47/7/11 Cumbria Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee

Council was advised that the County Council had requested that two standing deputies from Eden District Council be appointed to the Cumbria Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED that Councillors D Whipp and N Hughes be appointed as standing deputies on the Cumbria Health and Well Being Scrutiny Committee.

Cl/48/7/11 Notification of Amendment to Constitution - Portfolio Responsibilities

Council considered report CLS35/11 of the Director of Corporate and Legal Services which set out the amendments to the constitution required to give effect to the Leader’s allocation of areas of responsibility to the Portfolio Holders.

RESOLVED that Council note the Leader’s decision as to the allocation of the principal responsibilities for the Executive functions (Appendix 1 PDF: 463 Kb / 11 pages) for inclusion as a record within the Council’s constitution.

Cl/49/7/11 Vitality of Penrith: Project Progress Report

Council considered report PP45/11 of the Director of policy and Performance which showed Members the progress on various areas of work promoted through the Vitality of Penrith Group (VoP) chosen as a result of a community event held on 13 December 2010 and for which Eden has provided £200,000 capital and £30,000 revenue for approved projects.

RESOLVED that the Council acknowledge the progress on the various areas of work mentioned in the report including the Pedestrian and Movement Project, the Marketing and Events programme, the Greening of Penrith project and RDPE funded projects and offer continued support for the Vitality of Penrith Group.

Cl/50/7/11 Management of Succession Wider Issues

Council considered report CE13/11 of the Interim Chief Executive which provided an update on the various actions and responses arising from the Management of Succession The Council, in June, agreed a series of recommendations from the Leader as part of a series of reports which presented a way forward for the Council to refresh the Corporate Plan over the period until September to reflect the wishes of the electorate etc and to deliver the necessary budget savings of £1.1m to balance the medium term financial plan by 1 April 2012.

Motion by Councillor Nicolson

Seconded by J Thompson

That Council approve the re-establishment of the Transformation Board comprising the Leader, Deputy Leader, Resources Portfolio Holder and four Group Leaders as an advisory group to the Executive in order to consider implementation of the Management of Succession proposals, single office accommodation, achievement of savings targets and shared services.

Amendment by M Eyles that words be added to the motion to the effect that the group leaders be permitted to appoint a deputy to the Board to attend in their place in the event of their absence.

With the consent of the proposer and seconder of the original motion this amendment was incorporated into the original motion.

Amendment by N Hughes

Seconded by M Eyles

That the words ‘a renamed’ be inserted in the place of the word ‘the’ before the words ‘Transformation Board’

A vote was held and the amendment was lost.

A vote was held on the substantive motion and it was

RESOLVED that:

1.   Council approve the re-establishment of the Transformation Board comprising the Leader, Deputy Leader, Resources Portfolio Holder and four Group Leaders.

2.   That the four Group Leaders appoint deputies from within their Group to attend meetings of the Board in the event of their absence.

3.   That the Board act as an advisory group to the Executive in order to consider implementation of the Management of Succession proposals, single office accommodation, achievement of savings targets and shared services.

The Chairman gave consent for the following item to be considered as a matter of urgency as a delay of one meeting cycle would not be in the best interest of the efficient running of the service.

Cl/51/7/11 Appointment of Standing Deputy to the Scrutiny Co-ordinating Board

RESOLVED that Councillor A Connell be appointed as a standing deputy to the Scrutiny Co-ordinating Board for the Liberal Democrat Group.

Reason for urgency

The Liberal Democrat Group does not currently have a full allocation of standing deputies to the Scrutiny Co-ordinating Board. Consideration of this item at this meeting enabled the remaining place to be filled prior to the next meeting of the Board which would take place before the next full Council meeting.

Cl/52/7/11 Exclusion of Press and Public

RESOLVED that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, members of the public (including the press) be excluded from the meeting during discussion of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs one and three of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act.

The following minutes Cl/53/7/11 - Cl/54/7/11 contain exempt information as described in the relevant paragraph of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 and are excluded from this document by virtue of Section 100A of the Act. Below is a summary of these proceedings.

Minutes of the Human Resources and Appeals Committee 12 July 2011 (Cl/53/7/11)(Exclusion Paragraph No 1)

Council considered the minutes of the meeting of the Human Resources and Appeals Committee held on 12 July 2011 which had considered three applications for voluntary redundancy and recommended that Council grant the Committee delegated power to determine some applications for voluntary redundancy.

RESOLVED that:

1.   the minutes of the Human Resources and Appeals Committee held on 12 July 2011 be noted and

2.   the Human Resources and Appeals Committee be granted delegated power to determine applications for voluntary redundancy which are in accordance with the Council policies and where the costs of such applications can be met from savings in the current year’s budget.

Management of Succession: Interim Staff Issues (Cl/54/7/11)
(Exclusion Paragraph No 1)

The Council considered a report of the Interim Chief Executive which presented some of the staff issues that needed to be progressed to ensure that the Management of Succession process could proceed as quickly as practicable.

The recommendations in the report were agreed.

Cl/55/7/11 Date of Next Scheduled Meeting

The Council was informed that the date of the next scheduled meeting of Full Council would be held on 8 September 2011.

The meeting closed at 8.10pm