Agenda and minutes

Council
Friday, 1st March, 2019 2.00 pm

Items
No. Item

1.

Declarations of interests. pdf icon PDF 43 KB

Minutes:

Councillor Jefferson declared a personal interest in agenda item 9, Motion in respect of the Yorkshire Coast Destination Business Improvement District (DBID). in her capacity as a local business owner, although not leviable through the DBID, and President of the Scarborough and District Chamber of Trade and Commerce who attends the Welcome to Yorkshire Advisory Board.

 

 

2.

Apologies for Absence.

Minutes:

See above.

 

 

3.

Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 7 January 2019 to be read or taken as read as the case may be. pdf icon PDF 140 KB

Minutes:

In respect of agenda item 8 in the minutes, and Councillor Donohue-Moncrieff’s question about the Government’s decision to lift the borrowing cap to enable local authorities to build more homes, she commented that she still had not received a reply.  Councillor Donohue-Moncrieff then confirmed in reply to a question, that in respect of agenda item 13 in the minutes and the sexual abuse allegations she had received about a serving Council Member and officer, that the appropriate authorities had been informed.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 7 January 2019 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

 

 

4.

To consider any announcements by the Chief Executive

Minutes:

There were no announcements.

 

 

5.

To consider and pass resolutions on the following 'A' items:-

5a

Review of Council's Cumulative Impact Assessment (19/003) pdf icon PDF 44 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The recommendations in the extract minute from the Cabinet were proposed by Councillor Derek Bastiman and duly seconded.  The Cabinet Member for Communities, Councillor Turner welcomed the recommendation to retain the Cumulative Impact Zone in Whitby and urged all to continue reporting any incidents to the police.

RESOLVED that the Council:

a)        Note the analysis of the results of the consultation on the Cumulative Impact Assessment including comments received (attached at Appendix 1); and

b)        Approve the amended Cumulative Impact Assessment (attached at Appendix 2) post consultation.

 

Reasons

Recent amendments to the Licensing Act 2003 have placed a legal obligation upon Licensing Authorities to review and subsequently consult upon Cumulative Impact Assessments every 3 years. This is to ensure the assessment remains relevant and properly reflects the area to which it applies.

 

 

5b

Update to the Statement of Community Involvement (19/026) pdf icon PDF 39 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The recommendations in the extract minute from the Cabinet were proposed by Councillor Derek Bastiman and duly seconded. 

RESOLVED that the Council adopt the revised Statement of Community Involvement and that it is used thereafter as the basis for consultation on both the Policy and Development Management elements of Planning.

 

Reasons

Under the provisions of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as

amended), local planning authorities must prepare a Statement of Community

Involvement (SCI).  A local planning authority’s SCI is a statement of their policy for involving interested parties in matters relating to development in their area and should be reviewed at least every five years.

                                                                

Additionally, the Planning Inspector who examined the Local Plan, whilst confirming that all consultation requirements had been met, recommended that in light of comments from consultees that the SCI be reviewed at our earliest convenience.

 

 

5c

Schedule of Meetings 2019/20 (19/010) pdf icon PDF 38 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The recommendations in the extract minute from the Cabinet were proposed by Councillor Derek Bastiman and duly seconded.

RESOLVED that the Council adopts the Schedule of Meetings for 2019/20 as set out in Appendix A to the report.

 

Reasons

To help ensure that Council business is conducted efficiently, provides value for money, quality decision-making and promotes community participation.

 

 

5d

New Protocol for Members on Outside Bodies (19/006) pdf icon PDF 40 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The recommendations in the extract minute from the Cabinet were proposed by Councillor Derek Bastiman and duly seconded.

RESOLVED that the Council approves the new Protocol for Members on Outside Bodies appended to the report.

 

Reasons

To introduce a simpler, and more concise protocol which delivers the four objectives of:

1.    Enables Council appointees to understand their responsibilities

2.    Enables the Council to have a mechanism for feedback from appointees

3.    Maximises transparency to the public by providing more information on the full range of activities undertaken by elected Members – via published information

4.    Helps Members who are thinking about taking up a position on an outside body to decide if they want the role

 

 

5e

Review of Honorary Aldermen Criteria (19/007) pdf icon PDF 39 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The recommendations in the extract minute from the Cabinet were proposed by Councillor Derek Bastiman and duly seconded.  Members were advised that the purpose of the report was to simplify the criteria for qualifying for the title of Honorary Aldermen in recognition of the Council’s reformed governance structure and the reduced opportunities to serve as a committee chair.  Councillor Colling proposed an alternate motion that the Council ceasing conferring the title of Honorary Alderman with immediate effect.  Councillor Colling was then advised by the Chair that Members could propose an amendment to the recommendations in the report, but not a new motion.  Councillor Siddons confirmed the Labour Group’s position both against the proposed new criterion which he felt was too broad and against the title itself which he maintained was not appropriate in the modern age: serving on the Council and representing constituents was honour enough.  Councillor Cockerill argued against the report’s proposals, contending that the new criterion would in fact diminish the honour by not providing sufficient evidence that the former councillor had indeed “rendered eminent services to the council” as described in the Act.  Indeed the current criteria were deficient in this regard.  Instead he proposed the following alternative criteria supported by a selection process and a properly balanced panel of members to approve the nomination: “Past Members of the Council who have a minimum of 16 years’ service with the Borough Council or a predecessor authority and have rendered eminent services to the Borough Council”.  After being seconded, Councillor Cockerill’s amendment was put to the vote and was lost.  The substantive motion was then put to the vote and was carried.

RESOLVED that the Council approves a revised criterion for conferring the title of Honorary Alderman, that is:

           Past Members of the Council who have a minimum of 16 years’ service with the Borough Council or a predecessor authority

 

Reasons

Following a review of the Council’s current criteria, to ensure a fair, consistent and inclusive approach to recognising ‘eminent services’ rendered to the Council by past Members in accordance with the powers conferred by Section 249 of the Local Government Act 1972.

 

 

5f

South Cliff Gardens Project (19/004) pdf icon PDF 51 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The recommendations in the extract minute were proposed by Councillor Derek Bastiman and duly seconded.  Citing the Financial Strategy to be considered later on the agenda, Councillor Cockerill raised concerns that by committing the £1.576m funding and proceeding with this project, the Council would put future capital projects, potentially of a higher priority, at risk.  Councillor Siddons shared these concerns and called for an investigation into why what was originally estimated to be a Council contribution of some £300K towards Stage 2 of the project had increased significantly to £1.576m.  He nevertheless supported the delivery of the scheme.  Other Members spoke in favour of the report’s recommendations, acknowledging the pressures the Council’s proposed contribution would put on the capital budget which would need to be addressed, but also highlighting the implications of rejecting the scheme, which included losing  the Heritage Lottery Fund funding of £4.665m, losing the strong goodwill and support from within the local community, and, in essence, wasting a once in a lifetime opportunity to regenerate these much-loved gardens for the benefit of the town’s heritage, environment, wellbeing and economy.  Moreover, without the HLF and other external funding, it was contended that the Council would struggle financially to reinstate the gardens to an acceptable level after the major cliff stabilisation work.  Tributes were also paid to the Council’s Project Officer and to the South Cliff Community Group for galvanising the public to get involved in the project.  The Leader urged all Members to support the proposals, noting not only the sizeable HLF grant, but also the critical community element, without which the Council could not deliver the project.

RESOLVED that the Council:

i. Notes and appreciates the work of local community groups in supporting

the South Cliff Gardens project to date.

ii. Approves proceeding to the delivery stage of the South Cliff Gardens

project;

iii. Subject to the approval of the above, approves a scheme budget of

£7.032m to cover the capital, project and activity works associated with the

project; to be funded as follows: £4.666m Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) ,

£1.576m Borough Council resources set aside to progress the capital

strategy, £194k match funding from the Spa Coastal Protection scheme

budget, £133k from Section 106 contributions, £117k from local fund

raising, £235k from additional income, and £111k from in-kind

contributions;

iv. Notes that to progress the scheme the Council must underwrite potential

funding and income shortfalls that may arise on the £194k match funding,

£133k Section 106 contributions and £235k additional income. Any

positive or negative variation in the amounts received from these areas will

directly impact the Council’s contribution to the scheme;

 

And notes the Cabinet’s decision to:

v. Accept £4.665m (66%) HLF grant funding for the project and approve

entering into the grant funding agreement in Appendix B, noting that this

will include the requirement to register a restriction against the Council’s

title to the gardens;

vi. Instruct the Council’s appointed specialist landscape consultant Southern

Green Limited to proceed with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5f

5g

Regeneration Master Planning in Eastfield and the South Scarborough Strategic Growth Area (19/031) pdf icon PDF 48 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The recommendations in the extract minute were proposed by Councillor Derek Bastiman and duly seconded.  Eastfield ward Councillor Randerson supported the report’s recommendations but was heavily critical of the Middle Deepdale developers’ recent decision not to release the section 106 monies for the much needed works on Westway Road to remove the railings between Westway and the High Street as a vital first step to improve footfall on the High Street in Eastfield. 

RESOLVED that the Council:

1.    agree the allocation of £35k from capital receipts from the sale of land at Middle Deepdale toward the cost of regeneration master planning activity within the South Scarborough Strategic Growth Area;

And note the Cabinet’s decision to:

2.         approve the acceptance of up to £36k from the YNYER LEP toward the cost of master planning activity within the South Scarborough Strategic Growth Area (SSSGA).

3.         approve the commissioning of a holistic masterplan at a cost of up to £71k for the purposes of facilitating regeneration activity in the SSSGA in accordance with this report and the attached brief at Appendix 1.

 

Reasons

To facilitate a holistic approach to the regeneration of Eastfield and the wider

SSSGA

 

 

6.

Any reports going direct to Council

6a

Financial Strategy and Council Tax Setting 2019/20 pdf icon PDF 381 KB

To consider a report by the Director (NE) (Reference 19/055 attached)

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council considered a report by the Director (NE) (Reference 19/55) which sought approval of (i) the level of Council Tax for 2019/20, (ii) the Financial Strategy, (iii) Council Tax discounts and premiums, (iv) changes to the Discretionary Business Rates Relief Policy, and (v) Environment and Regulation Service fees and charges 2019/20.  Introducing the report, the Portfolio Holder, Councillor Mallory thanked Members who had attended the very informative budget briefings and the officers who had organised them.  Noting the public misconceptions about the Borough Council’s share of the proposed Council Tax evident in the recent budget consultations, Councillor Mallory explained the constituent parts, including the 12.38% of the total for Borough Council services.  Councillor Mallory commended the Council’s longer term approach to budget planning which had not only enabled the Council to balance the 2019/20 budget whilst allocating funding to address climate change and support projects such as the Cinder Track, but also to make significant strides towards identifying savings opportunities for 2020/21 and beyond.  She added that the decision to increase the Borough Council’s share of the Council Tax by 2.99% had not been taken lightly but was in response to ongoing cuts in central government funding and inflationary cost rises.  The proposed increase would generate in excess of £260K of core funding which would be used to protect and sustain frontline services.  There was a strong probability that the Government’s current Fair Funding Review (of local government funding post 2020) would be used to redirect scarce public funding to address the escalating costs of adult social care faced by upper tier authorities which would impact significantly on the monies available for other services.  It was on this basis that the Council’s budget projections assumed that funding cuts would continue over the medium term and that some £5m of savings would have to be identified for the three year period to 2022 to bridge the funding gap.  The proposals in the report identified £1.5m of that amount, of which a significant element would have a minimal impact on frontline services.  Councillor Mallory noted the Council’s strong track record of achieving savings, managing its budgets prudently and protecting services, whilst pursuing an ambitious investment programme to deliver regeneration and economic growth across the borough.  The monies available to deliver the Council’s Capital Strategy from different funding sources were currently projected to be some £5m plus capital receipts generated from the sale of assets.  £1.5m of this was earmarked for the South Cliff Gardens Project.  The Capital Strategy would be further developed during the coming year allowing capital resources to be utilised in a planned and structured way to provide the necessary funding to undertake essential works as well as the priority schemes which would deliver the Council’s longer term strategic priorities and objectives, particularly in relation to the regeneration of the Borough.  Speaking on behalf of the Labour Group, Councillor Siddons criticised the Council’s decision to accept the Government’s Council Tax Freeze Grant up to 2015/16 which had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6a

7.

To consider the following motions of which due notice has been given in accordance with Paragraph 12.1 of the Council Procedure Rules:-

7a

Motion in respect of apprenticeships and the benefits system pdf icon PDF 23 KB

Proposer: Cllr W Chatt

Seconder: Cllr S Turner

 

Minutes:

The Council considered the following motion which was proposed by Councillor Chatt and seconded by Councillor Turner:

 

Full Council resolves to:

1. declare an apprenticeship as a positive way of removing dependency from the benefits system

2. agree in the case of an apprentice who is given an allowance that this should not be treated as a wage and should be disregarded from the benefits system.  As this allowance is not taxed as a rule (!) we are not supporting a stealth tax on families

3. call on Westminster and Members of Parliament as well as the Local Government Association to change the system to stop taking the apprenticeship allowance away from families’ benefits.

4. recognise that a lot of families on benefits could stop their children from taking the opportunity of doing an apprenticeship because of families missing out on benefits, which families need and use to live, and see this as a barrier to prevent their children taking up an apprenticeship.

 

It was agreed that Council Procedure Rules be suspended for this item to enable the motion to be debated.  To provide greater clarity to the motion, Colling proposed an amendment to replace 2. with:

‘2. agree that any apprentice receiving the apprentice rate has that treated as an educational allowance (the rate is currently £3.70 an hour rising to £3.90 in April 2019)’

Councillor Chatt welcomed this amendment and then seconded it.  There was then further debate among Members about the apprentice rate in question, seeking confirmation that it excluded higher rates and that it was applicable to all apprentices.  In reply, Councillor Colling commented that the apprentice rate of £3.70 an hour was that claimed by 16-17 year olds and by apprentices of any age in the first year of their apprenticeship.  The motion as amended by Councillor Colling was then put to the vote and was carried.

 

 

7b

Motion in respect of the Yorkshire Coast Destination Business Improvement District (DBID) pdf icon PDF 19 KB

Proposer: Cllr S Cross

Seconder: Cllr N Murphy

 

Minutes:

The Council considered the following motion which was proposed by Councillor Sam Cross and seconded by Councillor Donohue-Moncrieff:

Full Council resolves that in recognition of legitimate criticism of the ballot process underpinning the Yorkshire Coast DBID, to set aside all involvement with this and other DBIDs for a period of five years.

 

It was agreed that Council Procedure Rules be suspended for this item to enable the motion to be debated.  Councillor Vesey questioned the relevance of five years – was not this too long a period of time to prevent the Council and local businesses revisiting the DBID opportunity?  Councillor Paul Cross felt the DBID was wrong in principle because of its adverse impact on many small businesses at this challenging time for the high street, and felt it should be rejected.  Councillor Turner who represented the east side of Whitby where many businesses affected by the DBID were located, highlighted their serious concerns about the consultation process underpinning the DBID which had excluded some of them.  She had shared these concerns with the Leader and other Members of the Cabinet, and as a consequence the Leader had written to the DBID company to suspend the Council’s involvement until a definitive response had been received by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to businesses’ request to disregard the result of the ballot.  Councillor Turner therefore urged caution about the DBID and voiced her support for the motion.  The Portfolio Holder for Legal and Governance, Councillor Nock, although sympathising with businesses’ concerns, commented that he could not support the motion in its current form, since the Council did not have the legal authority to enact it, thereby committing the next administration and the one after to inaction on an initiative which may prove ultimately of benefit to local businesses.  He therefore proposed the following amendment:

‘Full Council resolves that in recognition of legitimate criticism of the ballot process underpinning the Yorkshire Coast DBID, to set aside all involvement with it until such time as the Secretary of State has determined the appeal.  We will then consider our position along with the business community and will have the opportunity to take considered advice’.  The amended motion was then seconded by the Leader, Councillor Bastiman.  In response to a query by Councillor Siddons, the Monitoring Officer, Mrs Dixon confirmed that if the Secretary of State were to reject the appeal, then the DBID would go ahead, and then according to Councillor Nock’s amendment, the Council would take considered advice on how to address local businesses’ concerns and any other relevant matters.  Conversely, should the appeal be upheld, the Council would also re-consider its position, and explore the options available.  The Leader, Councillor Bastiman assured Councillor Siddons, that should the appeal be upheld, the matter including the next steps the Council should take based on considered advice, would come back to full Council for determination.  Councillor Bastiman also confirmed that he had written to the Chairman of the DBID to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7b

8.

To receive a statement by the Leader and deal with any questions arising from that statement. pdf icon PDF 46 KB

Minutes:

Councillor Derek Bastiman presented his Leader’s statement.  In reply to questions about progress with the critical junctions scheme, and whether ward councillors and the public would be involved in the consultation exercise in respect of the junction improvements, the Leader confirmed that the previous day the Local Enterprise Partnership had approved funding for the scheme (together with s106, County Council and Borough Council financial contributions).  He assured the meeting that through the County Council which would manage the scheme on a phased approach, public and ward councillors would be kept informed through the consultation process.

 

 

9.

To receive statements from each of the Cabinet Members and deal with any questions arising from those statements. pdf icon PDF 44 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillor Chatt presented his statement as Portfolio Holder for Public Health and Housing highlighting progress with the Selective Licensing Scheme which thus far had generated more licences than expected.  He referred to the positive effect of the scheme in driving up standards in private rented accommodation, the Council’s use of the new Civil Penalties Policy approved in November, and a film in which he had been involved charting improvements in local housing.  In reply to Members’ questions, Councillor Chatt confirmed that the InCab video equipment used in refuse vehicles was GDPR compliant, although he could not comment on the provision or not of video footage in Subject Access Requests.  He added that he would shortly be confirming the start and end dates of the garden waste collections this year.

 

Councillor Cockerill presented his statement as Portfolio Holder for Major Projects adding updates on the Whitby Piers and Clock Cafe Chalets projects.  Councillor Cockerill was pleased to report that following his concerns raised about the unacceptable appearance of the newly constructed parapet wall on the West Pier in Whitby, and the contractors’ failed attempts to redress the appearance of the structure, the concrete wall would be demolished and replaced by a structure consisting solely of stone blocks sourced from the same quarry as the original pier.  He felt this represented a solution appropriate to the location, heritage and listed status of the piers.  In respect of the Clock Café Chalets, Councillor Cockerill reported that the Council's consultant had prepared a design for the demolition of the chalets and the temporary stabilisation of the area.  However, as possibly 50% of the temporary work would have to be removed to allow the construction of the permanent solution the question of value for money had arisen.  Therefore, it had been agreed to start demolishing the chalets this month and the area to be left tidy.  Further discussions would then take place when the design of the permanent solution was available.  Without the design of the permanent stabilisation, Councillor Cockerill was unable to give a timescale for its construction.  Members then put questions to Councillor Cockerill about the stability of the Futurist site, South Bay bathing water quality, and the suggestion to install safety railings on the East Pier in Whitby.  In response, Councillor Cockerill commented that once the backfilling behind the piling on the Futurist site had been completed, the consultants had assured him the bank would be stable.  There would be no need for the land to stand empty for three years to achieve stability, as had been rumoured.  In respect of South Bay bathing water quality, Councillor Cockerill explained that that the Yorkshire Bathing Water Partnership (YBWP) consisted of representatives from Scarborough Borough Council (SBC), East Riding of Yorkshire Council (ERYC), Yorkshire Water (YW) and the Environment Agency (EA) with the collective aim of ensuring “all Yorkshire’s designated bathing waters exceed the minimum water quality classification of ‘Sufficient’” together with the vision of attaining “8 Blue Flags, helping Yorkshire’s coastline to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

To receive a statement from the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Board and deal with any questions arising from that statement pdf icon PDF 63 KB

Minutes:

Councillor Colling presented her statement as Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Board reminding Members that all were welcome to attend meetings of the Board.  Councillor Chatt commended Councillors Colling and Lynskey for the successful Cinder Track Review.

 

 

11.

To receive Minutes of the Council's Executive and Committees published since Council last met and appended hereto.

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meetings be received.

 

The Chair ended the meeting by thanking councillors for their service to the Borough in the last four years and sending best wishes to the Mayor who could not be present because of illness.