Shrewsbury & Atcham
Borough Council

MINUTES OF COUNCIL

21^ST APRIL 2008

PRESENT: The Mayor (Councillor Cooke)

Councillors Mrs. Allaway, Armstrong, Barker, Bebb Mrs Brennand, Bushell, Mrs Chebsey, Durnell, Farmer, Freestone, Mrs Holyoak, Jetson, Mrs. Jones, Kenny, Lord, Nutting, Mrs Owen, Owen, Parkhurst JP, Mrs Parsons, Price, D. Roberts, K. Roberts, Sambrook, Mrs Sandford MBE, Sheppard, Tandy, Townsend, Wagner, Ms Wild, Mrs Williams, J.M. Williams, S. Williams and Dr Winchester

Officers in attendance: Council Manager, Head of Finance, Assistant Council Manager/Monitoring Officer and Democratic Services Manager.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE: Councillors Adams, Clarke, Hendry Moore and Rees

MINUTES: 25^TH February 2008 – confirmed.

HAYDN SMITH AND FRANK LEATH OBE

The Mayor reported with sadness on the sudden death that afternoon of Haydn Smith, Assistant ICT Manager, and on behalf of the Council expressed condolences to his wife and family. He also reported on the death on Saturday, 12^th April 2008 of Frank Leath OBE and paid tribute to his work as an Independent Member of the Standards Committee. Members and officers stood in silence for several moments in respect to their memory.

PRAYERS: Prayers were said by the Reverend Thomas.

22/08 COMMUNICATIONS

The Mayor reminded members of the Tuscany evening to be held in aid of his chosen charities at North Farm, Felton Butler on Friday, 2^nd May 2008. He also thanked everyone who had attended his Own Church Service at St Andrew’s Church, Great Ness and invited members to joint him for drinks in the staff room after the meeting as this was the last Council during his Mayoral term of office.

23/08 TREE AND LANDSCAPE STRATEGY

It was proposed by Councillor Owen, seconded by Councillor Price and

RESOLVED:

That the draft Tree and Landscape Strategy be adopted as a policy document.

24/08 PURCHASE OF LAND AT THE DANA

It was proposed by Councillor Nutting, seconded by Councillor S Williams and

RESOLVED:

(a) That the Council purchase the 0.36 hectares of land situate and lying to the south of The Dana and to the north of the River Severn including a section of the River Severn, Castlefields, Shrewsbury (as outlined in Annex B to the report of the Assistant Council Manager (Town Clerk)) on the following conditions funded from capital receipts:

• The Council pays abortive legal and auction costs
• The Council meets any claim for abortive costs from intending bidders
• The Council agrees to acquire the land subject to the special conditions of sale for the lot as offered at auction
• Purchase price to be Market Value as assessed by the District Valuer

• Purchase to be completed within 28 days of the receipt of the District Valuer's valuation.

(b) That £50,000 be allocated from capital receipts for the purchase maintenance and improvement of the land into a pocket garden in 2008/09 and the land and maintenance responsibility transfers to Shrewsbury Town Council on its establishment.

(c) That the efforts of local Ward members, the MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham and the officers involved in securing the future of the land as open space with public access be acknowledged.

25/08 MEMBERSHIP OF STANDARDS COMMITTEE

It was proposed by Councillor Parkhurst JP, seconded by Councillor Armstrong and

RESOLVED:

(a)  That in accordance with Article 15.02(a) the membership of the Standards Committee be increased by the appointment of one additional parish representative.

(b)  That the new Parish Council representative be appointed by the Shropshire Association of Local Councils

26/08 INDEPENDENT CHAIRMAN OF STANDARDS COMMITTEE

It was proposed by Councillor Parkhurst JP, seconded by Councillor Armstrong and

RESOLVED:

That in accordance with Article 15.02(a) the following amendments to the Constitution Procedure Rules be approved:

1. Rule 11 – Questions by Members

Insert an additional Rule 11.7 to read: "The Chairman (or in his/her absence the Vice-Chairman) of the Standards Committee may answer any questions raised by Members of the council under Rules 11.1-11.3 above in respect of any matter which falls within the purview of the Standards Committee."

2. Rule 14 – Rules of Debate

Insert an additional Rule 14.14 to read:

"(a) In respect of those motions on notice under Rule 12 which affect the duties and responsibilities of the Standards Committee the Chairman (or in his/her absence the Vice-Chairman) of that Committee may make a statement on the motion immediately after the motion has been moved and seconded, and before any debate commences.

(b) Prior to any reports or recommendations from the Standards Committee being moved under Rule 13, the Chairman (or in his/her absence the Vice-Chairman) of the Standards Committee may present and speak to those reports or recommendations and then request that they be formally moved and seconded."

27/08 THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES (FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES)(ENGLAND)(AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2008

It was proposed by Councillor Nutting, seconded by Councillor Roberts and

RESOLVED:

(a)  That responsibility for the functions under section 106, 110, 111 and 113 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act relating to Local Area Agreements be vested in Cabinet.

(b)  That consequential amendments be made to the Constitution to reflect the decision in recommendation (a) above.

28/08 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL – INTERIM SCHEME OF DELEGATION

It was proposed by Councillor Parkhurst JP, seconded by Councillor Nutting that the recommendations of the Standards Committee in relation to the Interim Scheme of Delegation for Development Control be received and adopted.

It was moved as an amendment by Councillor Armstrong and seconded by Councillor D Roberts that the recommendation be amended by the addition and deletion of words in order that paragraph 1 of the Interim Scheme read as follows:

1. A councillor makes a written request for the application to be considered by the committee.

On being put to the meeting the amendment was carried with 27 members voting in favour, 5 against and six abstentions.

The original motion as amended was then put to the Council and it was

RESOLVED:

That subject to paragraphs 1 and 10 being amended to read as follows, the Interim Scheme for Delegation for Development Control be approved:

1. A councillor makes a written request for the application to be considered by the committee.

10. The officer is minded to approve or refuse an application and any of the following criteria apply:

• For major applications, a petition expressing a contrary view on planning grounds signed by a minimum of 30 persons or letters from at least 10 individual households expressing a contrary view are received;
• For other applications (in Shrewsbury) letters from at least 10 individual households expressing a contrary view relating to material planning issues are received; and
• For other applications (in rural parishes) letters from at least 3 individual households expressing a contrary view relating to material planning issues are received.

29/08 LICENSING AND SAFETY COMMITTEE – GENERAL PROCEDURE RULES AND LOCAL PROTOCOL

It was proposed by Councillor Parkhurst JP and seconded by Councillor Freestone that the recommendations of the Standards Committee in relation to the Licensing and Safety General Procedure Rules and Local Protocol for Members and Officers dealing with licensing matters be received and adopted.

It was moved as an amendment by Councillor Mrs Williams and seconded by Councillor S Williams that the recommendation be amended by the addition and deletion of words in order that paragraph 4.3 (Natural Justice) of the Local Protocol reads as follows:

Members with a personal and prejudicial interest must not sit on the Licensing Sub-Committee and determine the application. Such Members with a personal and prejudicial interest should not be present at the hearing (except in accordance with Paragraph 12 (2) of the Members Code of Conduct) and should not make written representations in their official capacity.

On being put to the meeting the amendment was carried with 29 members voting in favour and 5 against.

The original motion as amended was then put to the Council and it was

RESOLVED:

That, subject to Paragraphs 4.3 (Natural Justice) and 6.1 (Applications submitted by the Local Authority) of the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Licensing Matters being amended to read as set out below, the amended Licensing and Safety General Procedure Rules and the introduction of a Local Protocol for Members and Officers dealing with licensing matters as set out in the report of the Assistant Council Manager/Monitoring Officer be approved:

4.3 Members with a personal and prejudicial interest must not sit on the Licensing Sub-Committee and determine the application. Such Members with a personal and prejudicial interest should not be present at the hearing (except in accordance with Paragraph 12 (2) of the Members Code of Conduct) and should not make written representations in their official capacity.

6.1Where the Borough Council applies for a premises licence under the Licensing Act 2003 for open spaces or buildings which it owns, or where there is a variation application or review in respect of such open spaces or buildings and relevant representations are received, the Licensing Sub-Committee must hear and determine this application/review in exactly the same manner as other applications/reviews. The Licensing Sub-Committee must give no regard to the interests of the Council itself, aside from receiving relevant representations on this issue.

30/08 OVERVIEW COMMITTEE – ANNUAL REPORT

The Chairman of the Overview Committee (Councillor Barker) submitted for information the Annual Report of the Overview Committee.

31/08 SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – ANNUAL REPORT

The Vice-Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee (Councillor Kenny) submitted for information the Annual Report of the Scrutiny Committee.

32/08 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY FUNCTION 2008/20009

It was proposed by Councillor Nutting, seconded by Councillor D Roberts that the recommendation of Cabinet be approved, namely that the combining of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee be supported.

The recommendation was put to the Council and was lost. On the requisition of a member made before the vote was taken (and supported by at least five other members, who signified their support be rising in their place) the vote on the recommendation, was taken by way of roll call and was recorded as follows:

Members voting in favour of the motion: 13

Councillors Armstrong, Bebb, Mrs Holyoak, Nutting, Owen, D Roberts, K Roberts, Sheppard, Wagner, Wild, Mrs Williams, Winchester and The Mayor.

Members voting against the motion: 19

Councillors Mrs Allaway, Barker, Bushell, Mrs Chebsey, Durnell, Farmer, Freestone, Jetson, Mrs Jones, Kenny, Mrs Owen, Parkhurst JP, Mrs Parsons, Price, Sambrook, Tandy, Townsend, J M Williams and S J Williams.

Members abstaining from voting: 3

Councillors Mrs Brennand, Lord and Mrs Sandford MBE.

33/08 MOTION RECEIVED ON NOTICE – CONCESSIONARY TRAVEL

Due notice having been given in accordance with the Council’s procedural rules, the following motion signed by The Mayor and Councillors Armstrong, Jetson, Nutting, Owen, Mrs Owen, K Roberts, Mrs Sandford MBE, Mrs Williams and Dr Winchester was proposed by Councillor Owen and seconded by Councillor Nutting:

This Council will no longer enforce the 9.30 am rule for people using concessionary travel and use of the passes/cards will no longer be controlled by time restrictions.

On being put to the meeting the motion was carried.

34/08 QUESTION BY MEMBER – CONCESSIONARY SMART BUS CARDS – PRESS ARTICLES

The following questions were asked by Councillor Armstrong and replied to by Councillor Nutting:

Question:

Taking that after doing a survey of members only one member, who replied, had a single complaint about the implementation of the new Concessionary smart bus cards, will the Leader of the Council distance himself from the comments made by Councillors Durnell, Parsons and Tandy which appeared in an article on the front page of the Shrewsbury Chronicle on the 3^rd April 2008? Taking that I cannot ask the members concerned directly, can I also ask the Leader of the Council if any of these members have made it clear to him how many complaints they have received to justify the claim, that in their words is attributed to them in the Chronicle article "I think it is Abysmal" and how many complaints they feel out of the 15,000 cards issued need to be received to class the service as abysmal?

Answer:

I must say that when I read this article I was very disappointed and on investigation it was clear that it isn’t abysmal but it is excellent. Nearly all cards were received on time. I am going to ask the 3 councillors to visit our Customer Services or write a letter to them to apologise for the comments in the press. I am more than happy to look into the article to see if it did breach anything. I believe that it was ill judged and should not have happened.

At this point in the meeting in accordance with Council procedural rule 14.13 (Personal explanation) Councillor Mrs Parsons reported that she wished to explain that the Chronicle article which formed the basis of Councillor Armstrong’s question was inaccurate and misleading in respect of herself and Councillor Tandy. She continued that at no point had she made a statement stating that the Council’s procedures were abysmal. She indicated that she had taken the matter up with the reporter concerned and had received confirmation that a letter of correction would be published.

Supplementary Question:

Does the Leader of Council agree with me that at a time when our staff are under a lot of pressure, stress and uncertainty before any member makes a comment to the press then they should make sure of the facts before they speak to them. I take Councillor Mrs Parsons comments on board but they don’t make it clear how many complaints they had on Tuesday morning before the details were published. And also he should get an assurance from the Chronicle that reports are checked for facts before they go to print

Supplementary Answer:

The numbers will be answered by Councillor Owen later in the meeting. However I did some investigation and I am led to believe that it was the members of Council who instigated the article. However, the press don’t always print 100% accurate articles. I still think it would be appropriate for the 3 members mentioned to visit Customer Services to gain at least an understanding of the work they have done.

35/08 QUESTION BY MEMBER – CONCESSIONARY SMART BUS CARDS - PROJECT

The following question was asked by Councillor Armstrong and replied to by Councillor Owen:

Question:

As Portfolio Holder of the Project can you inform the Council how many complaints the officers have received over the implementation of Concessionary smart bus cards and also how many compliments the Council officers have received?

Answer:

Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough has received four compliment letters and zero complaint letters to date.

Fujitsu notified this Council on Friday 28^th March that the new cards had been dispatched. The Council issued a press release on the same day informing customers of this fact and adding that in the event that their new cards did not arrive on time they could continue to use their existing cards after 1^st April. The bulk of the cards were delivered on 1^st April. Numerous calls however were received by Customer Services on that day from customers (some irate) concerned that their cards had not arrived. The reason for these calls in many cases was entirely down to the fact that postal deliveries now are made much later in the day.

To date in 2008 SABC has ordered 14,925 new concessionary travel cards. As at 15^th April Fujitsu had dispatched 14,528 of these. The remaining 397 are currently being processed and are in the main made up of late applications.

Supplementary Question:

Taken that on a survey of members, the majority had no complaints, Councillor Price had one and Councillor Mrs Brennand received two, can the Portfolio Holder explain the numbers and the time they were received.

Supplementary Answer:

On the day that people were waiting for their cards to be delivered in the post, unfortunately they were not received in the early hours. As time went on, with late deliveries they came around mid-day and people were receiving them on the very day that they were complaining.

36/08 QUESTION BY MEMBER – FREECYCLE – HOME ESSENTIALS

The following question was asked by Councillor Kenny and replied to by Councillor Mrs Williams:

Question:

What effect is "Freecycle" having on Home Essentials and are they members?

Answer:

James Thompson, our Recycling and Sustainability Officer is working with both these groups who are recycling old articles and passing them to people with less money. There has been no detrimental effect on Home Essentials and when we run out of space we are able to pass them on to Freecycle. They complement one another and work well together.

Supplementary Question:

Home Essentials and Freecycle are real schemes, can you tell us about them and how we are supporting them?

Supplementary Answer:

I will let you have a written reply.

37/08 QUESTION BY MEMBER – CONCESSIONARY TRAVEL – ACCESS TO CLAIM

The following question was asked by Councillor Freestone and replied to by Councillor Owen:

Question:

Now that the rules/criteria for the disabled claiming concessionary bus passes have changed how is the Council ensuring that the disabled obtain their bus passes?

Answer:

Concessionary Travel information outlining the rules and regulations for disabled customers is available on the SABC website and in the main reception.

Together with other Shropshire Councils SABC also participated in a Radio Shropshire phone-in (Jim Hawkins Show, 3^rd April) to promote and clarify the new concessionary travel scheme.

To assist in the uptake of concessionary travel by the disabled SABC is now able to accept Disabled Persons Blue Parking Badges as proof of eligibility. It should be mentioned however that the Government has tightened up the rules in relation to the Disability Living Allowance. This can now only be accepted if it has the mobility component at the higher level.

Supplementary Question:

Does the Portfolio Holder agree that if he was disabled then he would find it difficult to claim concessionary travel.

Supplementary Answer:

Yes, I am sure I would. Outside of this meeting I will talk with officers about the various options available and come to some sensible arrangement.

38/08 QUESTION BY MEMBER – JUDICIAL REVIEW

The following question was asked by Councillor Kenny and replied to by Councillor Nutting:

Question:

Following a question to the Leader of the County Council we now know the cost to the County Council and to the taxpayer of the Unitary Judicial Review Process and subsequent appeal. Can you now supply us with the full details of all the costs to this Council of the Unitary Judicial review and subsequent appeal, including officer time for briefing, preparation, court attendances, overnight stays etc?

Answer:

I’ve attached a document with the amendment papers which would have been our claim for costs for the first hearing. The hourly rate is that allowed by the court rather than an accurate statement of the costs for the Chief Executive and Assistant Chief Executive (Monitoring Officer). The real hourly rates were £220. In addition there were another 3 days of the Assistant Chief Executive’s time for the appeal (£1800) plus £400 railway and hotel bills. All the other costs of the appeal will be met by either Congleton or the other councils who gave us funding.

As Leader of Shrewsbury and Atcham I am content that it was perfectly reasonable for the Council to try to stop the move towards a unitary council and the Council only spent a minimum amount of money on the legal action. All amounts were agreed by the Council and the action had a reasonable chance of success, although it has become clear recently that the present Labour Government is determined to bring in Unitary Government in the shire counties. The Labour Government has ignored all protest from local residents even though it was quite clear that a huge majority of local people in Shropshire were happy with the present system of district, borough and county councils.

I hope that the electorate will remember that it was Liberal members like Councillor Kenny who have supported the Labour Government through this upheaval and will vote them out at the election for the new unitary council to be held next year.

Supplementary Question:

Thank you for your answer. Are you really proud of setting councils against one another?

Supplementary Anwer:

I actually think that if anyone set anybody against anybody it was not this Council. The status quo was best and the majority of people voted in favour of this in a referendum. I really believe that Councillor Kenny is feeling embarrassed. We have done everything perfectly responsibly and appropriately. I regret the tone of his question.

39/08 DRAFT TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS 2008/2009

It was proposed by Councillor Nutting, seconded by Councillor D Roberts and

RESOLVED:

That subject to the Standards Committee on Tuesday, 14^th October 2008 being re-scheduled to Tuesday, 11^th November 2008 the draft timetable of meetings for 2008/09 be agreed and recommended for approval to the Annual Council Meeting on 15^th May 2008."

40/08 BOUNDARY REVIEW

It was proposed by Councillor Nutting, seconded by Councillor D Roberts and

RESOLVED:

(a)  That this Council confirms it support for the boundaries as shown on the following Maps:

• Map 2 Electoral Review – Shropshire County Council Ward Proposals With Revised Elector Figures
• Map 2a Electoral Review – Shropshire County Council Ward Proposals Town Insets With Revised Elector Figures: and
• Map 2b Electoral Review – Revised Ward Proposals – Shrewsbury Urban With Revised Elector Figures.

(b)  That this Council supports the contents of Appendix 1 of the papers submitted by the Leader showing various electoral figures.

(c)  That this Council also supports the report to Shropshire County Council of 4^th April 2008, Item 7, Paper B and in particular paragraph 5 referring to the size of the new council. This Council notes that the wording in paragraph 5.3 does not match some of the supporting maps particularly with reference to the number of councillors in the north and south of the county. Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council supports the concept of equalisation across the county and has concerns about some boundary proposals particularly in the south east of the county which appear to show more than a fair share of councillors for the electorate of the area.

(d)  That this Council confirms it support for the new council having a maximum of 75 councillors but prefers a solution which allows equal representation from each of the 3 sections of the county.

(e)  That this Council believes that the current parliamentary boundaries should remain.

(f)  That this Council supports the concept of matching the boundaries of the new council to the three parliamentary boundaries of North Shropshire, Shrewsbury & Atcham and Ludlow and this could be achieved by moving the current county council divisions of Albrighton and Shifnal into the Telford and Wrekin Borough Council area.

(f)  That this Council believes some of the future forecasts of the electorate for 2012 are too high and believes more work needs to be done to confirm the figures.

(g)  That this Council notes that Shrewsbury has been identified as a growth point for the West Midlands and this should be a consideration in future projections of electoral numbers.

41/08 APPOINTMENT TO MONKMOOR/UNDERDALE LOCAL JOINT COMMITTEE

RESOLVED:

That Councillors Freestone and Sambrook be appointed to serve on the Monkmoor/Underdale Local Joint Committee.

42/08 APPOINTMENT TO REA VALLEY LOCAL JOINT COMMITTEE

RESOLVED:

That Councillor Bebb be appointed to serve on the Rea Valley Local Joint Committee.

43/08 EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

RESOLVED:

That the public be excluded from the meeting under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the item to be considered involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

43/08 TRANSFER OF WASTE SERVICE

It was proposed by Councillor Mrs Williams and seconded by Councillor Sheppard that the recommendations of Cabinet in respect of the transfer of the waste service be approved.

It was moved as an amendment by Councillor Nutting and seconded by Councillor Roberts that recommendation (b) be amended by the addition of the words "or earlier in respect of Commercial Waste and Recycling Services" after the date "1^st October 2008".

On being put to the meeting the amendment was carried.

The original motion as amended was then put to the Council and it was

RESOLVED:

(a)  That the following portfolio of Waste Collections, Commercial and Recycling services, incorporating vehicles and operational staff, be transferred to the Shropshire Waste Partnership during October 2008 in advance of the new Shropshire Vesting Day on the 1^st April 2009:

• Domestic Waste Collection
• Kerbside Dry Collection

• Green Waste / Cardboard Collection
• Bring Bank Collection
• Commercial Waste and Skips
• Commercial Recycling
• Bulky Household Collection
• Clinical Waste Collection (domestic and commercial)
• Ancillary Recycling Service including Schools Paper Collection, Office paper and cardboard collection.

(b) That a formal request be made for this Council to join the Shropshire Waste Partnership in advance of the effective transfer date on 1^st October 2008 or earlier in respect of Commercial Waste and Recycling Services or other approved date thereafter.

(c)  That the transfer arrangements are subject to them being carried out on a cost neutral basis to this Council and that exercise takes account of the predicted financial out-turn for the service following the recent changes implemented during October 2007 and the future level of performance forecast for 2008/09.

(d)  That the proposals in (a) to (c) above be subject to final support from the Shropshire Waste Partnership (SWP) joint committee and its members.

44/08 LAND AT ARLINGTON WAY

It was proposed by Councillor Nutting, seconded by Councillor Roberts and

RESOLVED:

(a)  That the buildings on the site are cleared funded from capital receipts or if Growth Point Funding is available the site be cleared, the petrol tanks and contamination removed.

(b)  That the clearance of the site be undertaken using the Prince2 Project Management System and a Project Initiation Document (PID) for the scheme be prepared accordingly.

(c)  That, unless a satisfactory sale is previously agreed and approved by the Implementation Executive, the marketing of the cleared site be reviewed in September 2008 with a report to Cabinet and if advantageous to do so at that time then, subject to the approval of the Implementation Executive, the cleared site be re-marketed with clean title and the Council Manager in consultation with the Portfolio Holder and Council Leader be authorised to negotiate with interested parties and conclude the sale that provides best consideration to the Council.

(d)  That the capital programme remains as approved and the flow of capital managed.

(e) That the deposit paid by Morris Homes be returned as soon as possible.

 

 

 

6.15 p.m. – 7.35 p.m.