Agenda
Council
Date: Monday 10 October 2011
Time: 5.00 pm
Place: Council Chamber, Town Hall
For any further information please contact: Mathew Metcalfe, Democratic Services Officer Telephone: 01865 252214 Email: fullcouncil@oxford.gov.uk
The meeting will also be available via a webcast. This means that people may choose to watch all or part of the meeting over the internet rather than attend in person. The webcast will be available to view on the City Council's website after the meeting.
Council
Membership
Lord Mayor Councillor Elise Benjamin
Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor Alan Armitage
Sheriff Councillor Jean Fooks
Councillor Mohammed Abbasi Councillor Stuart McCready Councillor Mohammed Altaf-Khan Councillor Joe McManners Councillor Antonia Bance Councillor Mark Mills Councillor Laurence Baxter Councillor Matt Morton Councillor Tony Brett Councillor Susanna Pressel Councillor Stephen Brown Councillor Bob Price Councillor Clark Brundin Councillor Nathan Pyle Councillor Jim Campbell Councillor Mike Rowley Councillor Mary Clarkson Councillor Gwynneth Royce Councillor Colin Cook Councillor David Rundle Councillor Van Coulter Councillor Gill Sanders Councillor Stuart Craft Councillor Scott Seamons Councillor Roy Darke Councillor Dee Sinclair Councillor John Goddard Councillor Val Smith Councillor Michael Gotch Councillor John Tanner Councillor Beverley Hazell Councillor Bob Timbs Councillor Rae Humberstone Councillor Ed Turner Councillor Graham Jones Councillor Oscar Van Nooijen Councillor Bryan Keen Councillor Ruth Wilkinson Councillor Shah Khan Councillor David Williams Councillor Ben Lloyd-Shogbesan Councillor Dick Wolff Councillor Mark Lygo Councillor Nuala Young Councillor Sajjad Malik
HOW TO OBTAIN AGENDA
In order to reduce the use of resources, our carbon footprint and our costs we will no longer produce paper copies of agenda over and above our minimum internal and Council member requirement. Paper copies may be looked at the Town Hall Reception and at Customer Services, St Aldate’s and at the Westgate Library
A copy of the agenda may be:- - Viewed on our website – mycouncil.oxford.gov.uk - Downloaded from our website - Subscribed to electronically by registering online at mycouncil.oxford.gov.uk - Sent to you in hard copy form upon payment of an annual subscription.
SUMMONS
A meeting of the City Council will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, on Monday 10 October 2011 at 5.00 pm to transact the business set out below.
Proper Officer
AGENDA
Pages 1 MINUTES 1 - 32
Minutes of the ordinary meeting of Council on 11 July 2011.
2 DECLARATIONS OF INTE REST
3 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENC E
4 APPOINTMENTS TO COMM ITTEES
5 LORD MAYOR'S ANNOUNC EMENTS
(a) The Lord Mayor will announce the death recently of Kate Hayward, Telecoms Manager – ICT Strategy (Finance and Efficiency) and a minute’s silence will be held as a mark of respect.
(b) The Lord Mayor will welcome the new City Poet, Kate Clanchy, who will address the meeting.
6 SHERIFF'S ANNOUNCEME NTS
7 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE LEADER
8 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, THE CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER AND THE MONITORING OFFICER
9 ADDRESSES BY THE PUB LIC
To hear addresses from members of the public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.8 for which the required notice (1.00pm on Thursday 6 th October 2011) and the full wording of the address has been given to the Head of Law and Governance.
10 QUESTIONS BY THE PUB LIC
To hear questions from the public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.9 to the Leader or other Board Members of the City Executive Board for which the required notice (1.00pm on Thursday 6 th October 2011) and the full wording of the question has been given to the Head of Law and Governance and to hear responses from those Members.
CITY EXECUTIVE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
11 FUTURE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE MANAGEMENT O F THE 33 - 42 CITY COUNCIL'S PARK AND RIDE SITES - CITY EXECUTIVE BOARD, 21 SEPTEMBER 2011
12 LEISURE CENTRE DEVEL OPMENT PLANS PHASE 2 - CITY 43 - 50 EXECUTIVE BOARD, 21 SEPTEMBER 2011
13 CITY EXECUTIVE BOARD DECISIONS (MINUTES) AND SINGLE 51 - 72 EXECUTIVE MEMBER DECISIONS (DECISION SHEET)
City Executive Board decisions (Minutes)
(1) Minutes of the meeting held on 21 st September 2011
Single Executive Member Decisions (Decision Sheets)
(1) Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision meeting (Board Member – Corporate Governance and Strategic Partnerships) held on 3 rd August 2011.
(2) Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision Meeting (Board Member – City Development) held on 8 th August 2011.
(3) Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision Meeting (Board Member – Finance and Efficiency) held on 15 th August 2011.
(4) Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision Meeting (Board Member – Housing Needs) held on 18 th August 2011.
(5) Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision Meeting (Board Member – Finance and Efficiency) held on 7 th September 2011.
14 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS FROM THE SCR UTINY COMMITTEES
None.
15 QUESTIONS ON NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF COUN CIL
Questions on notice under Council Procedure Rule 11.10(b) may be asked of the Lord Mayor, a Member of the City Executive Board or the Chair of a Committee.
Questions on notice must, by the Constitution, be notified to the Head of Law and Governance by no later that 9.30am on Friday 7 th October 2011.
Full details of any questions for which the required notice has been given will be circulated to Members of Council before the meeting.
16 STATEMENTS ON NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF COUN CIL
Statements on Notice under Council Procedure Rule 11.10(b) may be made. Statements do not need to be directed to a specific Councillor.
Statements on notice must, by the Constitution, be notified to the Head of Law and Governance by no later that 9.30am on Friday 7 th October 2011.
Full details of any statements for which the required notice has been given will be circulated to Members of Council before the meeting.
17 CONSIDERATION OF PET ITIONS 73 - 74
The Head of Law and Governance has submitted a report which advises on the procedure that Council needs to follow under the Council’s Petitions Scheme in respect of large petitions, and to provide information specifically on the petition concerning publicly funded leisure in Oxford.
Council is being recommended to follow the procedure for large petitions in the Council’s Petitions Scheme by hearing the head petitioner for the petition entitled “No confidence in our Labour Council” and to then debate the petition and decide how to advise the Executive.
18 MOTIONS ON NOTICE 75 - 90
Council Procedure Rule 11.14 refers. The Motions (listed in the order received) that have been notified to the Head of Law and Governance by the deadline of 1.00pm on Wednesday 28 th September 2011 are attached to this agenda.
19 REPORTS AND QUESTION S ABOUT ORGANISATION S THE COUNCIL IS REPRESENTED ON
20 REVIEW OF POLLING DI STRICTS AND PO LLING PLACES 91 - 108
The Head of Law and Governance has submitted a report which asks Council to approve the Schedule of polling districts and polling places for the administrative area of the City Council as required by the electoral Administration Act 2006.
Council is asked:
(a) To approve the Schedule of polling districts and polling places as set out in Appendix A to this report;
(b) To give the Returning Officer the delegated power to make changes to polling stations in emergencies;
(c) To subsume polling districts GC into GB, KC into KA and ME into MC.
21 REVIEW OF FULL COUNC IL PROCEDURES AND OT HER 109 - 114 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
The Head of Law and Governance has submitted a report, the purpose of which is to review the operational and constitutional procedures applicable to Council meetings to allow for more efficient public engagement and to propose other constitutional amendments.
Council is asked:
(a) That the changes to Council procedures described in the report are agreed by Council
(b) That the Constitution be amended to reflect the changes proposed to the Council Procedure Rules, the Council scheme of delegation and the Contract Procedure Rules as set out in the body of the report, with effect from the 11 th October 2011.
(c) That every Council meeting is filmed and published on the internet.
22 MATTERS EXEMPT FROM PUBLICATION
If Council wishes to exclude the press and the public from the meeting during consideration of any aspects of the preceding agenda items it will be necessary for Council to pass a resolution in accordance with the provisions of Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 specifying the grounds on which their presence could involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in specific paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act if and so long as, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
(The Access to Information Procedure Rules – Section 15 of the Council’s Constitution – sets out the conditions under which the public can be excluded from meetings of the Council).
GUIDANCE ON DECLARING INTERESTS AT MEETINGS
What is a personal interest?
You have a personal interest in a matter if that matter affects the well-being or financial position of you, your relatives or people with whom you have a close personal association more than it would affect the majority of other people in the ward(s) to which the matter relates.
A personal interest can affect you, your relatives or people with whom you have a close personal association positively or negatively. If you or they would stand to lose by the decision, you should also declare it.
You also have a personal interest in a matter if it relates to any interests, which you must register.
What do I need to do if I have a personal interest?
You must declare it when you get to the item on the agenda headed “Declarations of Interest” or as soon as it becomes apparent to you. You may still speak and vote unless it is a prejudicial interest.
If a matter affects a body to which you have been appointed by the authority, or a body exercising functions of a public nature, you only need declare the interest if you are going to speak on the matter.
What is a prejudicial interest?
You have a prejudicial interest in a matter if; a) a member of the public, who knows the relevant facts, would reasonably think your personal interest is so significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgment of the public interest; and b) the matter affects your financial interests or relates to a licensing or regulatory matter; and c) the interest does not fall within one of the exempt categories at paragraph 10(2)(c) of the Code of Conduct.
What do I need to do if I have a prejudicial interest?
If you have a prejudicial interest you must withdraw from the meeting. However, under paragraph 12(2) of the Code of Conduct, if members of the public are allowed to make representations, give evidence or answer questions about that matter, you may also make representations as if you were a member of the public. However, you must withdraw from the meeting once you have made your representations and before any debate starts.
Agenda Item 1 COUNCIL
Monday 11 July 2011
COUNCILLORS PRESENT: Councillors Benjamin (Lord Mayor), Armitage (Deputy Lord Mayor), Fooks (Sheriff), Abbasi, Altaf-Khan, Bance, Baxter, Brett, Brown, Brundin, Campbell, Clarkson, Cook, Coulter, Darke, Goddard, Gotch, Hazell, Humberstone, Jones, Keen, Khan, Lloyd-Shogbesan, Lygo, Malik, Mills, Morton, Pressel, Price, Pyle, Rowley, Royce, Rundle, Sanders, Seamons, Sinclair, Smith, Tanner, Timbs, Turner, Van Nooijen, Wilkinson, Williams and Wolff.
13. MINUTES
Council resolved to approve:
(a) The minutes of the ordinary meeting held on 18 April 2011
(b) The minutes of the Annual Council meeting held on 19 May 2011
14. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillors declared interests as follows:-
(a) Councillor Van Coulter declared a personal and prejudicial interest in agenda item 9 (Addresses by the public – Address by Mark Pitt – Barton AAP and Ruskin Fields) as he was a Member of the Governing Council of Ruskin College (Minute 21(a) refers).
(b) Councillor Mary Clarkson declared a personal interest in agenda item 9 (Addresses by the public – address by Mark Pitt – Barton AAP and Ruskin Fileds) as she was a resident in the area (Minute 21(a) refers).
(c) Councillors Mohammed Altaf-Khan and Mike Rowley declared personal interests in agenda item 9 (Address by the public – address by Mark Pitt – Barton AAP and Ruskin Fields) as they were former students of Ruskin College (Minute 21(a) refers).
(d) Councillor Beverley Hazell declared a personal interest in agenda item 13 (Questions on notice from members of Council – Question 6 – St. Clement’s Car Park) as she was employed by the organisation which had recently purchased the Blue Boar Street offices from the Council. (Minute 25(a)(6) refers).
(e) Councillors Alan Armitage, Elise Benjamin, Tony Brett, Stephen Brown, Jim Campbell, Colin Cook, Van Coulter, Jean Fooks, Rae Humberstone, Mark Lygo, Susanna Pressel, Bob Price, Gwynneth Royce, Gill Sanders, John Tanner, Bob Timbs, Ruth Wilkinson and Dick Wolff, declared personal interests in agenda item 15 (Motions on Notice – Motion (b) – Public Sector Pension contributions increase) as they were members of the Local Government Pension Scheme (Minute 27(b) refers).
1 (f) Councillor Mark Mills declared a personal and prejudicial interest in agenda item 15 (Motions on Notice – Motion (e) – Health and social Care Bill) as his father was an employee of the Primary Care Trust. (Minute 27(e) refers).
15. APOLOGIES
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Stuart Craft, Stuart McCready, Joe McManners and Nuala Young.
16. APPOINTMENTS TO COMMITTEES
No appointments were made.
17. LORD MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
(a) The Lord Mayor during her first eight weeks in office said that she had received many visitors to the Lord Mayor’s Parlour which had been very enjoyable.
(b) The Lord Mayor’s Parade had taken place and despite the inclement weather the day had been very enjoyable and had raised funds for her two charities.
(c) The Lord Mayor thanked both the Deputy Lord Mayor (Councillor Alan Armitage) and the Sheriff (Councillor Jean Fooks) for deputising for her on engagements she was unable to attend.
(d) Council stood for a minute’s silence in memory of Kate Chirnside, Planning Lawyer – Law and Governance, who had passed away following a long illness.
18. SHERIFF'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
(a) A drive of the cattle on Port Meadow had recently been held.
(b) The Sheriff’s Aunt Sally Match had taken place and the Sheriff’s team had won one of the three matches.
(c) A meeting with Natural England would be held shortly concerning Port Meadow and its management.
19. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE LEADER
(a) The Leader thanked the Lord Mayor for the arrangements for the Lord Mayor’s picnic, which despite the rain had been a great day.
(b) The Leader said that despite Ang San Sui Chi, still not being allowed to leave Burma following the recent lifting of her house arrest, he was very 2 pleased that she had been able to record her lectures and suggested that the Council obtain recordings of these lectures.
(c) The Leader thanked officers for their work in achieving Investors in People (IIP) accreditation and welcomed the comments of the Assessor. He hoped that the good work would continue, so as to enable achievement of the bronze, silver and gold standards and that this work linked to the continuing improvements in the reduction of sickness levels at the Council.
20. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, THE CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER AND THE MONITORING OFFICER
The Chief Executive announced that he was delighted that the Council had been awarded Investors in People National Standard following a recent two week assessment. The Assessors had examined the processes and practices relating to organisation and people development and people management. Over 70 people from across the Council had been randomly selected and interviewed and on the basis of the discussions accreditation had been awarded. This nationally recognised award would enhance the reputation of the Council and reflected the progress made particularly in recent years. The Assessor concluded that “Oxford City Council values its people extremely highly and values learning and development similarly highly”. He also felt “(the Council) was made up of people who are proud of their jobs…..who are committed to performing at a high level…..and delivering outstanding service to residents, workers and visitors to Oxford”. The progress was a continuous journey, the next steps would be to continue building on the strengths and develop the areas for improvement. The Chief Executive said that an action plan was being designed around these aspects.
21. ADDRESSES BY THE PUBLIC
Council received four addresses (texts of the addresses appended to these minutes) as follows:
(a) Mark Pitt, a local resident submitted in advance details of his address to Council (now appended) on the Barton Area Action Plan (AAP) and Rusking Fields and addressed Council.
An explanatory note prepared by Oxford City Council officers was also submitted (now, appended).
Councillor Price, following the address reminded Council there was no decision before it at this meeting and that no decision would be taken until the autumn of 2012.
Councillor Van Coulter declared a personal and prejudicial interest as he was a Member of the Governing Council of Ruskin College. He took no part in the address and left the Council Chamber.
Councillor Mary Clarkson declared a personal interest as she was a resident in the area. 3
Councillors Mohammed Altaf-Khan and Mike Rowley declared personal interests as they were former students of Ruskin College.
(b) Nigel Gibson, a local resident, submitted in advance details of his address to Council (now appended), on the proposed new competition standard swimming pool in Blackbird Leys and addressed Council. Following his address he presented a petition to Council entitled “No confidence in our Labour Council”.
A note prepared by Oxford City Council officers was also submitted in response to the address (now appended).
(c) Martha McKenzie, Oxford University Students’ Union President and Daniel Stone, Oxford University Students’ Union Vice-President, submitted in advance details of their address to Council (now appended), which introduced themselves to the City Council and both addressed Council.
(d) Vim Rodrigo, a local resident, submitted in advance details of his address to Council (now appended) concerning unparished areas and new homes at rose Hill.
Vim Rodgrigo was not able to attend Council to make his address due to illness and his address was taken as a written submission.
22. QUESTIONS BY THE PUBLIC
Four questions were asked by members of the public:
(1) Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from James Rowland
Student units
“How many new student units have been built since July 2010? How many of these have been occupied? Can the figures for each university be provided, and how many net additional student units have been acquired for Oxford University and Oxford Brookes University since 2005?”
Response: The first question requires information from the Annual Monitoring Report 2011 for which data has not yet been collated or analysed. This data is likely to be available in September. The AMR 2011 is likely to be taken to the City Executive Board for approval for submission to the Secretary of State in December 2011. The City Council has no method of monitoring when student rooms are occupied so this question would be best directed to the Universities and colleges. The City Council is not itself able to monitor when the Universities acquire student accommodation. This would need to be obtained from the Universities directly. An exception would be if the acquisition resulted in the need for a planning application (such as a change of use) in which case it would appear in the data required for the AMR 2011 available in September. 4
(2) Question to the Board Member, Leisure Services (Councillor Van Coulter) from Charlotte Barrow
Competition Standard Swimming Pool consultation
“What’s the detailed evidence for people in Blackbird Leys wanting a new, somewhat colder 25m swimming pool at a different site, when the existing, smaller and warmer pool could be retained?”
Response: We have fully consulted and published the consultation on the proposed pool on the Council’s website. This information has continually been kept up to date. Alongside consultation other key factors in the decision making process are; Blackbird Leys pool is a stand alone facility just 482 metres from Blackbird Leys Leisure Centre, it is towards the end of it operational life and not meeting modern day standards (it is a small pool approximately 18 metres long) and it is not fully DDA accessible. The new proposed pool adjoined to the leisure centre will meet modern day guidance and be accessible to a wider user audience. The temperature of the new facility will be in line with industry standards and be able to maintain its temperature unlike Temple Cowley Pools which is unable to cope when the external temperature drops.
(3) Question to the Deputy Leader of the Council (Ed Turner) from Sietske Boeles
Council Tax Exemptions
“As from December 2010 how many properties were exempt from paying Council Tax due to being solely occupied by full time students, and:
(1) How many of these were classified as Halls of Residence and how many of these were classified as private properties;
(2) Has there been a decrease in student exempt Council Tax private properties since December 2009 and if not why;
(3) Does the Council get a full re-imbursement by central government for this loss of Council Tax.
Response:
Question 1 – As at December 2010 Halls of Residence = 2459. Student exceptions = 2969.
Question 2 – The number of students has increased which is documented on both the Oxford Brookes University and University of Oxford websites.
Question 3 – Under Council Tax legislation certain properties are exempt from Council Tax i.e. they don’t receive a bill. Exempt properties include student halls of residence and houses lived in only by full-time students. As such there is no Council Tax income collected and there is no re- imbursement from central government for this loss.
5 (4) Question to the Deputy Leader of the Council (Councillor Ed Turner) from Floris van den Broecke
“A Freedom of Information (FOI) request obtained from the Oxford City Council earlier this year, revealed that the number of private dwellings exempt from paying Council Tax due to being solely occupied by students went up by nearly 600 between 2004/05 and 2010/11.
Why has this number of student Council Tax exempt dwellings increased despite a great number of purpose built units being constructed for students in order to free up housing for Oxford’s permanent residents?
Can the City Council please tell me why so many dwellings have been lost from the residential housing pool? This can be done for example by analysing the tax exemption certificates provided by the education establishments supplied to the Council with the number of their students who have been issued with tax exemptions certificates?”
Response: Between 2004/05 and 2010/11 there has been an increase in students which is documented on both the Oxford Brookes University and University of Oxford websites.
Under Council Tax legislation certain properties are exempt from Council Tax i.e. they don’t receive a bill. Exempt properties include student halls of residence and houses lived in only by full-time students.
23. CITY EXECUTIVE BOARD DECISIONS (MINUTES) AND SINGLE EXECUTIVE MEMBER DECISIONS (DECISION SHEET)
Council had before it (previously circulated, now appended):
(a) Minutes of the City Executive Board held on 25 May 2011 and 22 June 2011
(b) Decision Sheets of Single Executive Member Decisions meetings:
(i) Board Member, Cleaner, Greener Oxford – 16 June 2011
(ii) Board Member, Cleaner, Greener Oxford – 29 June 2011
(iii) Board Member, Finance and Efficiency – 30 June 2011
City Executive Board – 25 May 2011 - Questions
(1) Councillor David Williams with regard to minute 4 (Fusion Annual Service Plan 2011/12) asked Councillor Tanner if he could identify the buildings that had been sold or mothballed ready for disposal as part of the 25% carbon reduction, and was this made up of selling the family jewels and if so was not a genuine reduction in carbon.
In response Councillor Tanner said he was proud of the 25% reduction and thanked officers for their hard work in achieving this. However it was only a beginning and it was right to put the Councils “own house” in order. 6 It was true that an element of the reduction had been achieved by disposing of vacant properties, and added that this was a valid way of reducing carbon emissions.
(2) Councillor David Williams with regard to minute 5 (Barton – Land Development) said that he was concerned at the change in policy regarding the percentage of social housing from 50% to 40%. He asked how when a general principle had been laid down, the Council could now decide to reduce the amount of social housing on the site.
In response Councillor Turner said that the Barton development required a large amount of upfront infrastructure and that if the full Core Strategy had kicked in with 50% required, then the scheme would not have gone ahead as it would not have been viable. He added that there was no question on compromising on social rented housing and that there may in the future be the opportunity to increase the amount of intermediate accommodation.
Single Executive Member Decision meeting – 16 June 2011
Councillor David Williams raised concerns on voluntary organisations not being exempt from the control and distribution of free printed Matter policy. He also raised concerns on the process of having a meeting with only one Member and questioned the democracy of this.
In response Councillor Tanner said that he too shared the disquiet of Councillor Williams on Single Executive Member Decision meetings and added that voluntary organisations were already exempt from the policy referred to.
Single Executive Member Decision meeting – 30 June 2011
Councillor Fooks questioned the amount of spending and felt that this should have been considered by the City Executive Board.
In response Councillor Turner said that Council had approved the capital programme and this decision was putting the details on to the large sums involved. He added that this decision had been available to call-in if Members had questions/concerns on the decision, but that a call-in had not been initiated.
24. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS FROM SCRUTINY COMMITTEES
None submitted.
25. QUESTIONS ON NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF COUNCIL
(a) Questions notified in time for replies to be provided in writing for Council
1. Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from Councillor Nuala Young
7 West Barton Development
“Where did the advice that the Barton West Development could not go ahead without a reduction to 40% social housing and lower energy limits come from? Who gave this ‘professional’ advice to the Council….or was it suggested by Councillors?
Could the portfolio holder explain what is the point of having a policy in the Core Strategy that generally upholds a 50% level of affordable housing when it is proposed that the largest development proposed in that strategy at Barton will not conform to that requirement?”
Answer: The Council sought advice from external professional property consultants, who advised that a scheme would not be viable with the delivery of 50% affordable housing, particularly having regard to the significant infrastructure costs associated, and the Council’s desire to maintain the provision of social rented accommodation. There is no suggestion that “lower energy limits” are being proposed.
The Council’s planning policies require a minimum of 50% of the proposed dwellings in any development to be affordable units, with 80% of that requirement being social rented and 20% shared ownership. The current policies provide that if a developer can very clearly evidence that a development is not viable at that level, then there is an opportunity to negotiate the social housing provision down to a level that makes the development viable.
2. Question to the Board Member, Housing Needs (Councillor Joe McManners) from Councillor Nuala Young
No.16 Tawney Street
“Is the portfolio holder aware that the Council was proposing to sell off 16 Tawney Street, a Council owned property, because they suggest it would cost too much to modernise. However this property had a substantial modernisation of the kitchen and bathroom done by a previous tenant and the reason given would seem spurious.
Could the portfolio holder provide figures to indicate how many other Council properties have been sold off over the last ten years using this criteria of ‘costing too much to modernise’.
Would the portfolio holder agree that it seems strange that developers seem able to find the money to improve these properties and sell them for a large profit but the Council seem unable to do the same.
Could the portfolio holder at least give an assurance that all the properties under this category are offered on the open market and that a variety of developers come forward to purchase the properties?” 8
Answer: This matter was reported to the City Executive Board on 20 th May 2009. The property was sold under Right to Buy Legislation 1978 and subsequently repurchased in 1985. During this sole period the previous owner built single storey extension to the rear which housed the kitchen and bathroom. Consultants at that time recommended that the extension needed rebuilding due to poor mortar joints in the brickwork and foundation problems. There were also works needed to meet the decent homes standards. At that time the cost estimate of the work was £50,000 for works to the extension etc plus approximately £13,000 to bring the property up to Decent Homes standard. Various options had been considered, but given the level of anticipated expenditure, a decision had been made to dispose of the property on the open the market.
All surplus property was offered for sale on the open market, and attracted a variety of purchasers.
It may be that the Councillor was unaware that assets from the sale of such properties were reinvested in improving the quality of the Council's housing stock, meeting the Decent Homes standard and going beyond it.
It is not surprising that investors have greater capital than Oxford City Council to undertake these works, since, if the property is subsequently rented out on the open market, the rent which can be charged is far higher. Of course, an alternative strategy would be for the Council to increase rents for such properties to 80% of the market level through the "affordable rent" process, and forego the receipt. This would mean less investment in our existing stock, and it would not provide the sort of affordable housing the administration believes is needed. However, we would welcome serious contributions which recognise the realities of the HRA financial position. We note that the Green Group has declined to propose costed amendments to the HRA budget in recent years, and has confined its interventions to complaints about the implementation of the budget, but perhaps this will change.
The Council does not retain the requested information on historic sales in a readily accessible form.
3. Question to the Board Member, Cleaner, Greener Oxford (Councillor John Tanner) from Councillor Matt Morton
Response to the Energy Conservation Act
“DCLG has repealed the Home Energy Conservation Act and in its place wants "all local authorities to play a role in the successful implementation of the Green Deal, whether as Green Deal providers in their own right, in forming partnerships with providers in their areas or in encouraging take up across communities" (March 2011).
9 Having earlier this year cut its external energy efficiency budget, how is the Council going to meet its Green Deal commitments?”
Answer: If and when the Coalition Government finally decides the details of its scheme we will be very pleased to get involved. Meanwhile and in any case we are working with our partners in Low Carbon Oxford to take this idea forward. It is vital that we find ways to invest in energy saving and renewable energy for Oxford's homes, both to help people cope with rising fuel prices and to help reduce the City's carbon footprint.
4. Question to the Board Member, Cleaner, Greener Oxford (Councillor John Tanner) from Councillor David Williams
Bonn incinerator
“No doubt the portfolio holder will be delighted to know that on a recent visit to Bonn our twin town in Germany I learnt that they are about to close down their incinerator built 19 years ago burning local waste materials and to convert it to a gas fired power station.
Would he agree that the move vindicates the recommendation in the so called ‘Bonn Report ‘on Waste Management and Recycling that burning waste was not a solution to waste management problems and that if Oxfordshire County Council went ahead with their controversial local incinerator it would very quickly become a redundant white elephant?”
Answer: Yes I'm pleased to hear about developments in Bonn. The Viridor incinerator at Ardley, commissioned by the County Council, will make Oxfordshire a rubbish dump for the rest of the country. Oxford City Council is completely opposed to the incineration of waste as a method of diverting waste from landfill.
Councillor Williams in a supplementary question asked if the portfolio holder would make late representation to the County Council on the incinerator. Both himself and Councillor Fooks had been taken to see an incinerator on a previous visit to Bonn and were informed that the facility was to be turned into a gas fired power station as the incinerator had become a ‘white elephant’, and that if the decision had been taken today, it would not have been built.
In response Councillor Tanner said that he would be happy to make representations and that it had been a bad day for Oxfordshire as the High Court had now given the incinerator the go ahead. He added that the incinerator would be a blot on the landscape and, in order to fulfil its capacity would have to draw in waste from outside the boundaries of Oxfordshire. He further added that this was a last century solution to a 21 st century problem and that because the City Council was part of the Waste Partnership it would have to send its mixed waste to this facility.
10 5. Question to the Board Member, Cleaner, Greener Oxford (Councillor John Tanner) from Councillor Clark Brundin
Garden waste collection
“Would the Portfolio Holder please provide the following information:
(1) The number of households having garden waste collected under the old arrangements with green Hessian bags (or estimate, if accurate figure is not available);
(2) The number of households paying for the new brown wheelie bin service;
(3) The number of households paying for the non-reusable sacks?”
Answer:
(a) Of 58,000 properties in Oxford about 40,000 are houses and each was issued with at least one hessian sack for garden waste. About 30,000 households used these sacks for garden clippings at least once a year.
(b) brown wheelie bins issued: 7127 paid for plus 2106 free = 9,233
(c) paper sack sets issued: 566 paid for plus 2 free = Total 568
A total of 9,801 households are participating in the new garden waste scheme, which is a remarkable success.
Councillor Brundin in a supplementary question said that the take- up was less than a third and asked if the new scheme with such a small take-up was actually viable.
In response Councillor Tanner said that he deplored the introduction of charges on any services, but the council had been forced into this through the spending cuts. He said that there seemed to be a misunderstanding of the £35 charge. The saving was the withdrawal of the present collection lorry. The new system had a lorry which only went to the properties which had subscribed to a brown bin, thus making the service quicker.
6. Question to the Deputy Leader of the Council (Councillor Ed Turner) from Councillor Nuala Young
St. Clements Car Park
“Could the Portfolio Holder confirm that the former Blue Boar Street Offices of the Council have been sold for many millions of pounds to an Evangelical Christian Community.
11 Given the fact that the local authority has received such large scale capital could he confirm that there is more to come with the sale of other properties and that as a consequence the need to make money from St. Clements Car Park project has dissolved?”
Councillor Beverley Hazell declared a personal interest as she was employed by the organisation which had recently purchased the Blue Boar Street offices from the Council.
Answer: It is confirmed that the property was recently sold to the Universities and Colleges Christian Fellowship, and the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students as joint purchasers. The purchase price was £3.255m.
There are a number of sources of capital financing, including capital receipts, prudential borrowing and direct revenue funding. Our proposed capital programme for 11/12 is GF £23.8m and HRA £11.2 the current programme allows for funding of £8.7m on GF and £2.6 on HRA in 11/12 from prudential borrowing which has a direct revenue impact, so we will wish to minimise this. Capital receipts will reduce the need for prudential borrowing and hence the financial pressure on General Fund revenue.
7. Question to the Deputy Leader of the Council (Councillor Ed Turner) Councillor David Williams
Hoarding money
“Could the Portfolio holder confirm that Council reserves are now well in excess of £5.2million and that despite the crocodile tears he knew in February that we would be in this position of having bloated balances?”
Answer: The Council’s General Fund working balance is in line with the Medium Term Financial Strategy presented to and agreed by Council in February 2011. The councillor will recall that the administration presented four-year budget proposals, and that balances reduce steadily over that period. It is not helpful to look at just the first year in abstract. I would also remind the councillor that we are losing close to a quarter of our central government grant in the first year alone, and that unfounded suggestions of ‘hoarding money’ risk detracting from the scale of central government’s attack upon public services in Oxford, and in particular upon local government. The truth is that these government funding cuts have been hard for the Council to bear and have necessitated significant sacrifices on the part of our workforce and the people of Oxford.
As at the 31 st March 2011 the General Fund working balance (subject to audit) stands at £4.4m as per the budget plan. The budget approved by Council for 2011-12 provides for a further £0.8m to be transferred into balances in year. Hence the balance at the 31 st March 2012 is projected to be £5.2m. Over the subsequent 3 years of the Medium Term Financial Strategy (2013- 12 15) the General Fund working balance is budgeted to reduce to £3.7m.
There is an underlying pressure of £0.6m in subsequent years which if not addressed will erode the General Fund working balance further.
The Council’s earmarked reserves, (those held for specific purposes and including the Insurance Fund) increased by £1m in 2010/11. This is predominantly a consequence of a windfall VAT reimbursement of about £800k and an underspend on the 2010/11 budget. An earmarked reserve to support capital expenditure has therefore been created, which reduces the scale of borrowing to fund the capital programme.
All reserves held will be reviewed as part of the annual refresh of the Medium Term Financial Strategy which will take place in the autumn.
Councillor Williams in a supplementary question said that the Council should not be in a position of having bloated reserves of £5.2m and asked the Portfolio Holder for a commitment that there would not be a spending spree in Labour controlled Wards prior to the 2012 local elections.
In response Councillor Turner said that a four year budget had been set and within this there were inbuilt pressures in each of the years, otherwise the Council would have to make all of the cuts in one go. These reserves would be drawn down over the coming four years and in year four, the level of reserves would be at the minimum level required. He further added that the Administration would not be allowed to go on a “spending spree”.
8. Question to the Board Member, Finance and Efficiency (Councillor Ed Turner) from Councillor David Williams
Partners who go bankrupt
“Could the Portfolio Holder list the names and the number of partners and contractors (such as Capital Shopping and ISIS) who have gone into liquidation or simply withdrawn from the ‘partnership’ during their relationship with the City Council over the last 10 years.
As Labour have been in control for the bulk of that time could the Portfolio holder explain why this authority has such a poor track record when it comes to evaluating potential partners and contractors? Would the portfolio holder agree this stream of partner contractors going into liquidation or pulling out is a symptom usually associated with local government in the third world?”
Answer: The Council does not specifically retain the type of information requested in the first question. I find the final question
13 rather tasteless and am surprised that the councillor is so unaware of the impact of the recession upon the UK’s construction sector.
However, over the past 12 months two construction companies engaged on capital schemes have gone into administration, they are: Rok and Isis Projects Limited. The Council has reviewed its procedures as a consequence. It should be noted however, that due to the slow economic recovery market conditions remain difficult and in procurements for contracts covering several months or years it is impossible to guarantee that the contractor will remain financially robust throughout the period.
The position with Capital Shopping Centres is entirely different and a consequence of the company opting to assign its leasehold interest to Crown Estate. Capital Shopping Centres cited a change in their business model as the principal reason for their withdrawal. As a result, the Council novated the benefit of the development agreement to Crown Estate. Crown Estate have subsequently entered into a 50:50 joint venture with Land Securities; this matter is amply set out in papers of the Council’s City Executive Board, and I am very happy to investigate if the councillor has not received them.
Councillor Williams in a supplementary question asked if the portfolio holder would agree that the response did not actually answer the question. He asked for actual facts and figures on how much these failures had cost the Council and the rate of failures.
In response Councillor Turner said that the Council’s Procurement Team had undertaken outstanding work on reducing costs to the Council. He added with regard to the Westgate Centre, that many shopping centre schemes had not gone ahead because of the recession and Capital Shopping Centres had not gone bankrupt.
9. Question to the Board Member, Finance and Efficiency (Councillor Ed Turner) from Councillor Jean Fooks
Customer Services Area – Inspection of Planning Applications
“Accepting that the intention in the new Customer Services area is to restrict public access to planning applications to looking at plans on screens, will there be enough space in the new offices for planning officers, building control officers and sometimes the public to look at large plans when necessary?
Answer: The new Customer Service Centre will have a separate large table to enable the public to look at large plans. In addition, there would be six interview rooms that also have tables that could be utilised. One of these rooms is particularly large (fifteen square metres). This room will also have a large television screen that will be available to view large plans, and there will be a bank of six self service computers, three of which will have twenty two inch screens available to view plans. Finally, there is display space
14 designed into the Customer Service Centre so that planning models can be viewed.
Councillor Fooks in a supplementary question asked if a large space not just for the public, but for officers as well, be provided as a screen would not be enough.
In response Councillor Cook said that this would be the case.
10. Question to the Board Member, Finance and Efficiency (Councillor Ed Turner) from Councillor Jean Fooks
Review of new Customer Services Area
Can the Board member assure Council that the new Customer Services area will be monitored after six months to see what changes , if any, are needed to the layout and public access to planning applications? ”
Answer: The service provided by the Customer Service Centre will be constantly monitored, from customer and officer feedback. We shall be implementing a system where customer feedback is provided at the point of service delivery, customers being able to record their experience at a kiosk in the Customer Service Centre. Internal reviews will be performed after two weeks, eight weeks and three months. The Customer Service Centre is designed to be flexible, within the limits of the space available in the building.
11. Question to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) from Councillor Matt Morton
Cowley Road Carnival
Would the Portfolio holder join with me in expressing our disappointment that the Cowley Road Carnival will not be held on Cowley Road again this year?
`Would he acknowledge that the primary reason why the carnival has retreated to South Park to stage what in effect is the old Fun in the Park Festival of yesteryear is lack of money. This being the case would he agree that there is a strong case for a much larger central donation of funds from the City Council especially as the perennial funder, the East Area Parliament has been abolished?”
Answer: The character of the Carnival is clearly affected by its location. Sunday’s event was seen as a great success by the organisers from Cowley Road Works both in the quality of the entertainment and the level of community participation in the parade. It also covered its costs of about £75k. In recent years, the bulk of the funding for the Carnival was supplied by the City and County Councils from corporate budget heads, but in the wake of the savage reductions in grant income from the Tory/Lib Dem coalition, these budget heads are no longer available. The City Events team is now funded only for the two major civic occasions; 15 Xmas Light Night and the Lord Mayor’s parade/picnic. In 2012, a specific additional allocation has been made for the Olympic Torch Relay and associated evening event.
The Carnival Trustees are considering the scope for attracting additional funding from local businesses and community groups for future years with the support of Saira Khan and we are in close touch with them in support of these initiatives.
There was also a special allocation for May Day and this will be incorporated as a core event.
Councillor Morton in a supplementary question said that organisations etc. had regretted that the Carnival had not been in Cowley Road, but it was still a wonderful event. He asked if the Portfolio Holder could suggest a form of organisation that could organise the event in a way that the local community wanted and importantly access funding for example from European Union funds.
In response Councillor Price said he too would like to see the Carnival back in Cowley Road and even though the event was not organised by the City Council Events Team, the Team did provide advice to the organisers. He added that there was an issue of funding and he was disappointed at the lack of support from local businesses, but hoped that this funding would increase in future years. He further added that for the 2012 Carnival the City Council Events Team may be able again provide advice not just on the organisation, but also on ways of identifying and bidding for national funding.
Councilor Price acknowledged the support of BMW Mini for the 2011 Carnival as they had stepped in at the last minute, when it looked like the Carnival would not take place. He also said that with the 2012 London Olympic torch Relay coming to Oxford it may be possible to link the two events.
12. Question to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) Councillor David Williams
A Humiliating Grace at the University of Oxford
“Would the Leader of the Council join with me in congratulating the Dons at the University of Oxford in making history by passing a motion of no confidence in the Universities Minister David Willets during a debate on the National Coalition Government’s Higher Education policies?
Would he agree that if Labour had won the election judging by comments from Peter Mandelson the Universities Minister until 2010 the same grace would have been passed on a Labour Minister for they would have followed exactly the same policies?”
16 Answer: I doubt that Mr Willetts will regard the motion passed by Congregation as a humiliation since the Coalition’s policy for higher education is explicitly intended to remove government funding from teaching and to reduce support for research in order to stimulate private institutions which provide lower quality instrumentalised forms of post secondary education. The Coalition’s policies are designed to reduce the proportion of GDP spent on higher education to well below the OECD average, in contrast to the last Labour Government which consistently restored the unit of resource and raised the level of participation to around 45% of the age cohort. A re-elected Labour Government would have maintained those policies.
Councillor Williams in a supplementary question asked if the Portfolio Holder would agree that the last line of his response was highly dubious.
In response Councillor Price said that he did not and that while there may have been changes to the funding regime, there had not been changes to the voucher scheme, nor would they (the previous Labour Government) have gone for a set number of places at a set fee.
13. Question to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) from Councillor Nuala Young
Harwell Radiation Monitoring and Fukushima
“Is the portfolio holder aware that the Harwell Atomic Research Centre monitoring in Oxfordshire picked up an increased level of airborne background radiation 5 days after the nuclear meltdown at the Japanese Fukushima nuclear plant on 11 th March 2011 ?
Is the portfolio holder concerned at the global impact of this meltdown, confirmed now by the Japanese authorities as the worst nuclear accident ever to have taken place and the fact that the plant continues to emit airborne radiation eventually finding its way to Oxford and all other cities across the world?
Would he agree that the Fukushima meltdown is more evidence that a new generation of nuclear power stations is not a wise investment and that the UK should be taking the road of the German Government of an end to nuclear and large scale investment in cheap and safe renewable energy sources ?
Would the Leader of the Council seek to contact Harwell Monitoring Centre to establish clearly the level and nature of the radiation threat to Oxford and if the present increased levels have been sustained?”
Answer: The Health Protection Agency has confirmed that the levels of background radiation detected locally after the Fukushima incident did not constitute a material risk.
17 Trace levels of iodine 131 ranged from 80-94 micro becquerels per cubic metre/minute, caesium 134 from 38-46mbs and caesium 137 from 38-42 mbs. Tellerium 132 was not detectable.
The evidence that can be drawn from Fukushima incident on the safety and resilience of nuclear power plants is two-fold: a) it is unwise to construct such plants immediately above a known major earthquake fault line; and b) even in such a hazardous location, the more modern Fukushima Daini plant, that is located immediately adjacent to the damaged Fukushima Daiichi plant and was affected by the same earth tremor and same tsunami wave, went into emergency cold shutdown and survived.
As George Monbiot expressed it in an article last week, ‘using a plant built 40 years ago to argue against 21 st century power stations is like using the Hindenburg disaster to contend that modern air travel is unsafe’. And it remains the case that France has generated 80% plus of its electricity from nuclear power for the past 30 years without incident.
If one starts from the premise that the greatest threat facing humanity at present is the acceleration of global warning, the reaction of the German government can only be seen as a disaster, pushing , as it eventually will, an extra 40 million tonnes of CO2 a year into the atmosphere. A rational response to the Fukushima incident, as to the earlier Chernobyl and Three Mile Island cases, is to increase the pace of technical innovation in fourth generation systems that will run on the waste produced by current technologies, to increase the risk based design requirements for new nuclear stations and, of course, to increase investment in renewables.
14. Question to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) from Councillor David Williams
Oxford votes yes for electoral reform
“Would the Portfolio holder join with the Green Party in congratulating the people of Oxford in voting YES in the recent referendum on electoral reform and would he agree that although the vote was lost nationally this is not the end of the debate related to making our voting system more proportional and democratic.
Could he confirm that divisions amongst Labour Party leading figures and poor leadership was the primary cause of the failure of the national referendum to endorse electoral reform and that when it matters the majority of Labour MPs put their own security of tenure before democracy?”
Answer: The result of the referendum on the Alternative Vote system was primarily a consequence of the massive unpopularity of the Liberal Democrat Party after a year of their coalition partnership with the most right wing government that the UK has ever experienced. A system which that party championed, and 18 which was seen as potentially benefiting a group of politicians who were perceived to have systematically reneged on their principles and key policy pledges was not likely to recommend itself to the UK electorate. Neither did it recommend itself to the many people who would wish to see a proportional representation system, since they would agree with Mr Clegg that it was a ‘miserable compromise’.
Councillor Williams in a supplementary question asked if the Portfolio Holder would agree that the feeling for democracy in Oxford was rejuvenated by the AV Campaign and that the desire for democracy was strong and this would be shown at the next elections.
In response Councillor Price said no.
15. Question to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) from Councillor Dick Wolff
The No.4 Bus
“Was the City consulted about the re-routing of buses such as the no 4? Does he agree with the decision to cut off thousands of people in the west of the City from the rail station and the east of the City? Will the Leader be writing to the Oxford bus companies about this and the numerous other reductions in services that are being announced alongside the welcome news of the cross ticketing?”
Answer : No; the bus companies keep the City Council well informed about their decision but do not consult us even informally on routing decisions.
I will happily raise these points with the companies and with the County Council which is the transport authority for the City.
(b) Questions notified by the deadline in the Constitution (replies given orally at Council)
16. Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from Councillor Jean Fooks
Planning Policy CP15, Energy Efficiency
“Can the Board Member confirm that Policy CP15, Energy Efficiency, in the Local Plan 2001-2016 does still apply to development in Oxford? Could he explain why the provisions in this policy i.e. developments will be assessed against the following criteria:
(a) The use of appropriate materials, siting, form, orientation and layout of buildings to maximise the benefits of passive solar (or natural) heating, cooling, lighting and natural ventilation:
19 (b) The use of soft landscaping, including tree planting, to increase summer shading and reduce heat loss in winter; and
(c) The use of energy efficient, renewable-energy technology, whether new or traditional, for heating, cooling, power and lighting. do not appear to be followed in the way planning applications are being assessed at present? Why are none of these criteria regularly mentioned in the reports to Planning Committees?”
Response: No. Local Plan policy CP15 has been superseded by Core Strategy Policy CS9"
Councillor Fooks in a supplementary question asked why the Council was reneging. In response Councillor Cook said, firstly it is worth highlighting that carbon emissions are already being reduced through the progressive tightening of the Building Regulations. The current administration is committed to Zero Carbon buildings and has confirmed that they will be continuing to strengthen Part L of the Building Regulations. Zero Carbon for residential buildings will become the industry standard by 2016, and for non- residential buildings by 2019.
Policy CS.15 of the Oxford Local Plan has now been replaced by Core Strategy Policy CS9. This is an important policy and reducing the impacts of climate change is a key plank of the Core Strategy. Policy CS9 is in two distinct parts. The second part maintains a continued support for the NRIA which applies to all qualifying developments and has been a successful tool for mitigating climate change. Qualifying developments comprise of 10 or more residential units or non-residential developments of 2,000m 2 and over, or a pro-rata combination of the two. The headline from the NRIA is the 20% renewable energy which is provided on- site.
The first part of Policy CS9 states that “All developments should seek to minimise their carbon emissions”. This is a policy which encourages and supports the minimisation of carbon emissions as part of development proposals. The policy continues “Proposals for development are expected to demonstrate how sustainable design and construction methods will be incorporated”. Again, this encourages inclusion of energy efficiency measures through design, layout orientation, landscaping and use of materials, although they are not all necessarily directly applicable in all planning proposals and as such there is no specific requirements to be referred to in every report. Indeed details of some of these elements of the proposal are required by conditions on the planning permission. Where relevant, one 20 or more of these criteria are some of the material considerations that are weighed in the balance and officers use them in assessing planning proposals. I shall ask officers to consider making reference to them in committee reports, where directly relevant and appropriate.
17. Question to the Board Member, Leisure Services (Councillor Van Coulter) from Councillor Dick Wolff
QUEST Assessments and the SALIX Funds
“Blackbird Leys Leisure Centre, Ferry Leisure Centre, Hinksey Outdoor Pool and Oxford Ice Rink will be completing QUEST assessments in the 2011/12 operational year. Why has City Leisure not submitted Temple Cowley Pools for this assessment?
Could the Portfolio Holder also indicate why Temple Cowley Pools were not entered for SALIX funded energy efficiency projects as other leisure centres seem to have been.
In addition could the Portfolio Holder give an assurance that this was not part of some devious plan to make Temple Cowley look inefficient in terms of its energy usage compared with other sites and thereby create another justification to push ahead with Labour’s massive waste of ratepayers money in building a new pool at Blackbird Leys and closing Temple Cowley”?
Response: We are committed to continually improving the service standards across all our leisure centres and with our partner Fusion Lifestyle have made marked improvements in this area.
We are due to receive a report at the City Executive Board on the 21 st of July on the proposed competition standard pool at Blackbird Leys Leisure Centre which in turn would result in the closure of Temple Cowley Pools. As such it would not be the best use of resources to put Temple Cowley Pools through a quality audit.
SALIX energy funding is in essence a loan where the monies are paid back from the savings generated . While we have previously made several adaptations to Temple Cowley to improve its energy efficiency the potential closure means that SALIX would only be used if opportunities with a very short pay back were identified.
Councillor Wolff in a supplementary question asked what opportunities had been considered for a quick and immediate payback.
In response Councillor Coulter said that it was a simple economic proposition. Various options were considered and 21 the payback would not work. He expected that a report would be submitted to the City Executive Board on 21 July 2011.
18. Question to the Board Member, Leisure Services (Councillor Van Coulter) from Graham Jones
Competition Pool canvassing
“Will the Portfolio Holder please detail the canvassing of opinion by individual Councillors about the proposals to build a competition pool at Blackbird Leys and to close Temple Cowley Pool, which were referred to on the report to the City Executive Board on 22 June? Will he also say what additional canvassing of opinion he has personally conducted since 22 June and what were the results in terms of those for, against, and undecided about the respective proposals?”
Response: Councillors canvassed people across Oxford and that these discussions were within a Councillor/constituent relationship which would require the consent of the constituent in order to answer the question.
Councillor Jones in a supplementary question asked if the Portfolio Holder would accept his thanks for his very diligent fact finding and if he could provide some information, informally he would be grateful. In response Councillor Coulter agreed to speak with Councillor Jones informally.
19. Question to the Board Member, Cleaner, Greener Oxford (Councillor John Tanner) from Councillor Matt Morton
Oxford Brookes First for Green Policies
“Would the Portfolio Holder join with me in congratulating Oxford Brookes University in their national ranking with a first for their Green Policies? Would he agree that this top ranking is a model that other universities and colleges in the City should seek to emulate. Would he give a commitment to write to the Pro Vice Chancellor of Brookes to congratulate her on the University’s first class award for Green Standards?”
Response: Councilor Tanner congratulated Oxford Brookes University, which was one of our partners on its award for green standards.
20. Question to the Board Member, Cleaner, Greener Oxford (Councillor John Tanner) from Councillor Dick Wolff
Cancellation of Single Member Decision Making event
22 “Can the Portfolio Holder explain why his Single Member Decision making meeting scheduled for 16 th June was cancelled with only 2 hours notice?”
Response: Councillor Tanner said that the reality was that the meeting was not cancelled, indeed it met and a member of the public was there. It was important that meetings were publicised, more so than the City Executive Board. The actual meeting which was cancelled was the meeting concerning the Board Member for City Development, as there was no decision to make. Dates for Single Member Decision Meetings were placed in the meetings calendar on the assumption that there would be decision to make. However as these dates are set in advance, sometimes there are no decisions that need to be taken and the meeting was cancelled. The meeting which was cancelled was done so with more than five working days notice and not the 2 hours as stated in the question.
21. Question to the Board Member, Finance and Efficiency (Councillor Ed Turner) from Councillor David Williams
Standingford House Small Business Centre
“What is the occupancy rate of the Standingford House Small Business Centre?”
Response: The property comprises 18 units situated over two floors of which 11 (61%) are currently let. 4 lettings are in progress/under offer which officers are reasonably confident will complete. This will then give an occupancy of some 83%."
22. Question to the to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) from Councillor Matt Morton
Blackbird Leys Pool the ‘Preferred Option’?
“The Portfolio Holder is on record as saying that the building of a new super pool at Blackbird Leys has been identified by previous studies as the ‘preferred option’. Could he confirm that the only report that comes to such conclusion was the 2009 report written by Ian Brooke, Head of Leisure and therefore not independent.
Would the Leader of the Council give an undertaking that the whole decision regarding the building of a new pool at Blackbird Leys will be investigated by a truly independent board and the social cost of taking out of commission Temple Cowley Pool be an integral part of that investigate?”.
Response: Councillor Price informed Council of the various stages and reports:
23 (i) Deloitte report commissioned in 2001 (ii) KPMG report commissioned in October 2006 (iii) MACE report presented in August 2010 (iv) Sport England and Oxford Sports Partnership also involved in the process
Councillor Morton in a supplementary question asked if a further independent report be requested as he had concerns on the independence of the MACE report as he felt it had not been as impartial as it should have been. In response Councillor Price restated that the MACE report was an independent report.
23. Question to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) from Councillor Dick Wolff
Council website and Area Forums
Now that Labour have abolished a layer of local democracy with the Area Committees, why is it that some Area Forums seem to get a great deal more publicity than others on the Council website? Why for example does the Cowley Area Forum seem to have so much more coverage that the others? Could the Leader of the Council deny the rumour that the lover levels of publicity given to the East and North areas may be as a result of these areas having the good sense not to return Labour Councillors?”.
Response: Councillor Price said he had spoken with the Communities and Neighbourhoods Manager who informed him that all Forums would have a press release a week before each took place. The issue raised in the question, was due to press releases being issued at different times by the Team Leaders. However the Council’s website did carry the dates of each Forum.
24. Question to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) from Councillor David Williams
Parking meters in very small car parks
“Clearly the Council must establish parking meters on a minor car parks which are being used as mini park and rides by commuter, but does the Leader of the Council agree that establishing meters on very small car parks that are obviously related to local parks may be a barrier to people from all over the city enjoying these facilities, Cutteslowe Park being a prime example?”.
Response: Councillor Price said that this had been looked at as part of the budget process and there was a difference between car parks. A great deal of comments had been received during the consultation and these would be analysed and a report submitted in due course. 24
26. STATEMENTS ON NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF COUNCIL
Councillor Tony Brett gave the following Statement on Notice
“I want to make a brief statement about the implementation of new additional HMO licensing scheme. While I recognise and fully support the vital work of holding landlords to account and ensuring adequate and safe conditions for tenants I do want to sound a note of caution about discouraging landlords to stay in the HMO market.
Oxford is a lively and vibrant City and has a large population of young people trying to make their way after School, College or University. Housing is scarce and expensive and living in HMOs is the only way many such people can afford to stay in Oxford. I have seen one example (near to my own home) and heard of others where I wonder if perhaps this Council is requiring more work than is strictly necessary on properties that are being used as-built (i. e. with no extra bedrooms or partitions, or rooms being used as bedrooms that were intended for other use), and to modern building regulations standards. While I of course understand the duty of care the Council has to HMO residents I hope that will be kept in balance with the need to maintain a supply of HMOs for those who are not able to afford to live in our wonderful City of Oxford in any other way. Our City's economy is strong and healthy and this is due in no small part to the number of skilled professionals that live here. I would hate to get into a position where they can no longer afford to live in Oxford because too many landlords have chosen to leave the HMO market.
It is a delicate balance and I certainly have no sympathy for landlords that don't look after their properties ensuring they are safe for their tenants, nor for tenants who engage in antisocial behaviour. On the other hand I don't want to see tenants who are responsible members of the community who do not keep neighbours awake, do not have loud parties, do not abuse parking and properly manage their refuse and recycling to be the unintentional victims of a licensing regime that is meant to protect them, not drive their landlords out of the rental market and therefore them out of their homes.
I am grateful to officers for taking the time to discuss this issue with me in the last week or so and grateful for all the excellent work they are doing in bringing Oxford’s HMO stock up to a good and safe standard. I also welcome the fact that the council has taken my comments on board and I'm sure officers will bear them in mind when making future assessments of works required to recently- built and/or non-overcrowded residential dwellings. I will be asking the portfolio member for housing for an update in a question to Council later in the year on progress in this important and delicately-balanced area.”
Councillor Turner in response to the statement said in the future smaller HMO’s would require a license. Work continued by Officers with landlords across the private rented sector and the scheme would continue to be monitored and a report would be submitted in the autumn.
25
27. MOTIONS ON NOTICE
Council had before it nine Motions on Notice and reached decisions as follows:
(a) Proposed closure of BBC Oxford News Operations – (Proposer – Councillor Stuart McCready)
This Council notes with concern the reported plan to close BBC Oxford and move the BBC's operations from here to Southampton, with the loss of the local news and sport bulletin and the discontinuation of many local radio programmes, to be replaced with national and regional content.
This Council further notes that BBC Radio Oxford is Oxford's most popular local radio station and has risen in popularity over the past year, increasing from 76,000 to 80,000 listeners according to May's Radio Joint Audience Research figures.
This Council believes that local news is important to local democracy, and that local journalism helps build community by being able to keep in touch with what is important to local people and to shape reporting accordingly.
This Council opposes the BBC's plans, strongly asserts the importance of local broadcasting to people in Oxford, and resolves to request the Leader and the Chief Executive to write to the Director-General of the BBC, the Chair of the BBC Trust and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport expressing our views.
Following a debate, Council voted and the Motion was adopted.
(b) Public Sector Pension Contributions – (Proposer - Councillor Mike Rowley)
Council notes with grave concern the decision of the coalition government announced in the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) to impose a 3.2% contribution increase on members of the Local Government Pension Scheme. Scheme average member contributions will increase from 6.6% to 9.8% next year. Additionally the value of all local government employees’ pensions will be reduced on a cumulative basis by the change in the basis of indexation to the Consumer Price Index (CPI)
Council shares the views expressed by the Local Government Association (LGA) in its letter to the Chancellor of February 16 th 2011 where it pointed out that this level of increase will inevitably lead to a massive increase in opt-outs from the pension scheme by lower paid employees who form the majority of the local authority workforce.
Council resolves to write to the Chancellor, the Chief Secretary and the Secretary of State for Local Government to support the LGA and to call for a fundamental rethink of this damaging approach to public sector pension schemes.
26 Councillors Alan Armitage, Elise Benjamin, Tony Brett, Stephen Brown, Jim Campbell, Colin Cook, Van Coulter, Jean Fooks, Rae Humberstone, Mark Lygo, Susanna Pressel, Bob Price, Gwynneth Royce, Gill Sanders, John Tanner, Bob Timbs and Ruth Wilkinson, declared personal interests as they were members of the Local Government Pension Scheme.
Following a debate Council voted and the Motion was adopted.
(c) Business Rate Concessions – (Proposer – Councillor David Williams)
Given that the New Localism Bill will return the Business Rate back to local authority control and the new legislation may provide the Council with the opportunity to vary the business rate within the City, this Council asks the Executive to investigate the potential of establishing enterprise zones where a special reduced business rate focused on helping small independent traders are established in different parts of the City. The report on the possibility of introducing such a scheme to be brought to the Executive in the autumn once the full extent of the new legislation is known with a view to the potential implementation in the financial year 2012 -2013.
Councillor David Williams withdrew his Motion on Notice.
(d) Repeal of the 1908 Smallholdings and Allotment Act – (Proposer – Councillor Nuala Young)
This Council invites the Executive to stand opposed to the suggested abolition to the 1908 Smallholdings and Allotment Act (Section 23) which orders Councils to provide sufficient number of allotment plots to local residents where there is a demand. The Executive is invited not to place allotments and smallholding in its list of potential land sales to developers as envisaged in the Localism Bill and existing allotment sites will not appear in Council plans for future housing development.
The Executive’s stance on this issue should be made known to Mr. Eric Pickles the Secretary of State for Communities who is known to be suggesting the repeal of the 1908 legislation under his list of new measures to supposedly reduce Council bureaucracy. Mr. Pickles to be informed that the regulation requiring local authorities to provide allotments is not burdensome or extra red tape and is a vital aspect of communities growing their own food and supporting local sustainability.
Councillor Young’s Motion on Notice was not considered as Councillor Young was not present at the meeting.
(e) Health and Social Care Bill – (Proposer – Councillor David Williams)
Although there have been cosmetic changes recently announced by the Coalition Government to the proposed Health and Social Care Bill , this Council is still concerned at the likely impact of the proposed new legislation on health social care provision in Oxford and throughout the Country. This Council is concerned that the central theme of introducing competition and private sector tendering via GP led consortia with an 27 agency (Monitor) to stimulate private sector involvement remains a core element of the proposed legislation. The key objective of the legislation to open up the NHS to private sector cherry picking remains and the gradual erosion of NHS delivery under the proposals will still be the end result.
The Council is also concerned at the cost of the reforms estimated at over £2billion especially the redundancy of senior administrators within the present Primary Care Trusts and their subsequent re-employment with the GP commissioning consortia, a move that will alone cost in excess of £1billion. With this in view and the NHS facing a £20 billion shortfall in its revenues this Council calls on the Government to abandon the proposed legislation and return with more progressive reforms that include providing revenue that will match the increasing demands on the NHS.
Councillor Mark Mills declared a personal and prejudicial interest as his father was an employee of the Primary Care Trust. He took no part in the debate and left the Council Chamber.
Following a debate, Council voted and the Motion was adopted.
(f) BBC Oxford Studio Closure – (Proposer – Councillor David Williams)
This Council is opposed to the proposal by the BBC Trust to close their Oxford Banbury Road Studio and see the concept as a significant dilution of the BBC commitment to local broadcasting services. The proposed ending of the local radio and television production centre would deny the people of Oxford a truly comprehensive service and mean that local communities do not have a voice.
There is a recognition that the Coalition Government have frozen the license fee for six years and that this would lead to sustained reductions in the BBC’s services. However local radio and television is as much a part of the BBC as any other aspect of the Corporation’s activities and centres of local journalistic excellence such as Oxford should be retained .
Council resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to the BBC Governors expressing our concerns.
Following a debate, Council voted and the Motion was adopted.
(g) Charges for Residents Parking Zones – (Proposer – Councillor Alan Armitage
Council notes from Oxfordshire County Council's Provisional 2010/11 Revenue and Capital Outturn Report (Annex 7) that income from residents' parking zones in Oxford City exceeded costs by over £110,000, despite repeated assurances from representatives of the County Council that residents were only being asked to ensure that RPZ administration costs were recovered.
Council condemns this duplicity and asks the Chief Executive to write to the County Council to demand that a rebate is paid to residents who have been forced to pay excessively high charges for the privilege of parking near their own homes. 28
Councillor John Tanner moved an amendment:- to add a further sentence at the end of the proposed Motion on Notice, to read – ‘Council reaffirms its opposition to any charges being made for residents’ parking in Oxford’.
The mover of the substantive Motion, Councillor Armitage accepted the amendment and following a debate, Council voted and the amended Motion was adopted as follows:
Council notes from Oxfordshire County Council's Provisional 2010/11 Revenue and Capital Outturn Report (Annex 7) that income from Residents' Parking Zones in Oxford City exceeded costs by over £110,000, despite repeated assurances from representatives of the County Council that residents were only being asked to ensure that RPZ administration costs were recovered.
Council condemns this duplicity and asks the Chief Executive to write to the County Council to demand that a rebate is paid to residents who have been forced to pay excessively high charges for the privilege of parking near their own homes.
Council reaffirms its opposition to any charges being made for residents parking in Oxford.
(h) Speed Limit Enforcement – (Proposer – Councillor Alan Armitage)
Council welcomes the fact that speed enforcement by Thames Valley Police using roadside cameras has come back into effect. Council believes that enforcement of all speed limits is necessary to ensure that injuries and fatalities on Oxford’s roads continue to reduce.
Council therefore calls upon Thames Valley Police to give enforcement of 20mph speed limits in Oxford their urgent attention.
Following a debate Council voted and the Motion was adopted.
(i) Garden Waste Collection Arrangements – (Proposer – Councillor Clark Brundin)
Council is very concerned at the discriminatory nature of the recently introduced arrangements for the collection of garden waste. Residents who cannot accommodate the brown wheelie bin are charged over four times as much for the same annual volume of garden waste if they opt for the new non-reusable sacks. In addition, the sacks can only be obtained in Cowley and Horspath.
Council is further very concerned that the relief for those on benefits appears to apply only to the bin charge, and not the sack charge.
Council believes the costs of collection should be shared equally among participating residents, and therefore requests that:
29 1. The number of sacks available for £35 should be increased accordingly, as should the number provided for £25;
2. Much more convenient ways of obtaining the new sacks should be provided, with them being available at City Centre offices or delivered by crews on request once initial payment has been made;
3. The relief for those on benefits must apply to the charge for sacks as well as the charge for bins.
Following a debate Council voted and the Motion was not adopted.
28. REPORTS AND QUESTIONS ABOUT ORGANISATIONS UPON WHICH THE COUNCIL IS REPRESENTED
(1) Councillor Brown asked Councillor Price if any decisions had been taken by the Oxford Strategic Partnership (OSP) and the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and if so, whether the minutes of these meetings could be placed on the Council’s website.
In response Councillor Price said that £350k had been allocated to the LEP and that the County Council had also allocated a large part of its Economic Unit to the LEP as well. He said that the LEP suffered from faults which had been highlighted by Labour Councillors as they had no funding or powers of their own and were not a voice of business. Oxford Business First had more say on issues. He further added that the LEP was holding an away-day to try and clarify the support available for local businesses. With regard to the OSP, this was a very successful body.
(2) Councillor Jones asked Councillor Price for an update on the East/West Rail Consortium. In response Councillor Turner said that he was the representative on the Spacial Planning and Infrastructure Partnership. He said that the EWR Bid had been turned down. However there remained interest and discussions continued between district local authorities on how they might be able to contribute to the costs. All local authorities remained supportive of the proposals.
29. HONORARY RECORDER - APPOINTMENT
The Head of Law and Governance submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) the purpose of which was to advise Council of the position of Honorary Recorder and to invite Council to appoint the Resident Judge at the Crown Court as Honorary Recorder in place of His Honour Judger Julian Hall who is no longer the Resident Judge.
Council resolved:
(a) To appoint His Honour Judge Gordon Risius CB to the post of Honorary Recorder of Oxford for as long as he hold the position of resident Judge at the Crown Court;
30 (b) To thank His Honour Judge Julian Hall for his services as Honorary Recorder.
30. MATTERS EXEMPT FROM PUBLICATION
None.
The meeting started at 5.00 pm and ended at 8.35 pm
31 This page is intentionally left blank
32 Agenda Item 11
Extract from the Minutes of the City Executive Board Held st on 21 September 2011
25. OPERATION OF PARK AND RIDE SITES
The Executive Director for City Services submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) setting out proposals for changes to the management of the Council’s three Park and Ride sites in a way that met the requirements of the City Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy.
Councillor Turner confirmed the view of many Councillors that it was regrettable but unavoidable to reintroduce charging at the City’s three park and ride sites. The charge, he added, was being proposed to cover the City council’s running costs of the sites and would not be a method of income generation.
The Board was addressed by Councillor Fooks who referred the issues of partnership working between the City and County Councils.
Resolved
(1) That taking into account the requirements of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy and the savings provided by different working arrangements to agree that a parking charge of £1.50 per day should be introduced at the Redbridge, Seacourt and Pear tree Park and Ride Sites within the City of Oxford;
(2) To note that the necessary steps were being taken to make a variation Order to give effect to the changes in the method of payment as set out in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the report and to season tickets and other concessions that might be agreed by the Director for City Services in consultation with the Board Member; and
(3) To RECOMMEND Council to agree a capital budget in the order of £264,000 for the purchase of equipment required to operate the service, financed from Section 106 receipts.
33 This page is intentionally left blank
34
To: City Executive Board
Date: 21 September 2011
Report of: Executive Director City Services
Title of Report: Future Arrangements for the Management of the City Council’s Park and Ride Sites
Summary and Recommendations
Purpose of report : To set out proposals for changes to the management of the Council’s three Park and Ride sites in a way that meets the requirements of the City Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy
Key decision: Yes
Executive lead member: Councillor Colin Cook
Policy Framework: Corporate Plan and Medium Term Financial Strategy
Recommendation(s):
1. That taking into account the requirements of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy and the savings provided by different working arrangements the Board agrees that a parking charge of £1.50 per day is appropriate at the three Park and Ride Sites within the City of Oxford.
2. To note that the necessary steps are being taken to produce a variation Order to give effect to the changes in the method of payment as set out in paragraphs 10 – 12 and to season tickets and other concessions that might be agreed by the Director for City Services in consultation with the Board Member.
3. To RECOMMEND that Council agree a capital budget in the order of £264k for the purchase of equipment required to operate the service, financed as far as possible from Section 106 receipts and the residual from the redirection and virement of Direct Services budgets.
Appendices to report – Appendix 1 - Table showing impact of a range of fees in balancing the Council’s budget position.
35
Background
1. Budget pressures faced by Oxford City Council and Oxfordshire County Council have led to changes in the way the City Council’s Park and Ride services are to be delivered.
2. Three years ago the County Council took over the running of the City Council’s three Park and Ride sites - Peartree, Redbridge and Seacourt - subsidising the City Council's costs and loss of income. The Thornhill and Water Eaton sites are outside the City boundary, managed by the County Council and are not the subject of this report.
3. Budget pressures mean that this subsidy (circa £1m) can no longer be afforded by the County Council And, as a consequence, the three Park and Ride sites in the City will return to the management of the City Council, as provided for in the original transfer agreement.
4. It remains the City Council’s aspiration to provide a free Park and Ride service for people coming into the City in recognition of the economic and environmental benefits that this brings. However, it is not possible to achieve this in the context of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan as it would require an additional £1million of savings to the current Council budget savings target of circa £10 million over the next 4 years .
5. In view of this, officers have examined the scope for making substantial savings in the operation of the park and ride sites in order to minimise the financial impact and the level of fees that have to be levied to cover costs.
Park and Ride Operation
6. The three Park and Ride sites in the City are extensive, providing parking to around 1 million commuters, shoppers and visitors a year. The extensive nature of the provision brings with it substantial operational and maintenance costs including a high staffing cost. New operational models have been examined which use new technologies and best practice from other authorities and the private sector.
7. Reflecting the innovative opportunities that these present, the management of the sites will in future be handled through a combination of automatic vehicle recognition and mobile security/enforcement patrols integrated with the rest of the Council’s car parks patrol service.
8. This approach will make a significant saving in running costs and enable a lower fee to be charged than would otherwise have been necessary to meet the requirements of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy.
9. Reflecting best practice in the industry the charging mechanism should meet the following tests:-
36
a. It should not involve pay and display which requires the motorists to purchase a ticket on foot and return to their vehicle to display the ticket;
b. The charge should be in round numbers and involve no more than 2 coins;
c. There should be methods of automatic payment by telephone and the internet.
10. It is proposed that the Council’s successful mobile phone access to parking payments through the Ringo system should be extended to the Park and Ride sites. This system already accounts for around 120,000 payments a year and is very popular. In addition a web based system to allow single, multiple and season ticket purchases will be introduced.
11. Purchase on foot will be managed through a ticket machine which records the vehicle registration number and does not require a ticket to be displayed on the vehicle.
12. Enforcement will be carried out using Automatic Number Plate Recognition (APNR) units, fitted to patrol vehicles; these units are linked to the charging mechanisms and provide real time information on payments.
13. With these proposals to minimise the management costs of the sites the requirements of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy will be met through a daily parking charge of £1.50. This is very competitive with the cost of City centre parking and maintains the gradient in parking charges which falls from the City centre to the park and ride sites at the edges of the City.
Level of risk
14. With appropriate mitigation the risk is assessed as low.
No. Risk Description Mitigation Likelihood Impact Score H= Link to Corporate High, Objectives M= Medium L= Low Set fee with knowledge 3 3 9 M 1. Income levels of “market”. not achieved Include resistance in leading to future budget calculations. budget Careful budget pressures monitoring. 2. Legal Land and property and 3 3 9 M impediment to car parking law issues charging. dealt with. 3 Conflict with Consult with bus 1 2 2 L bus main company on operator. proposals.
37
4 Failure to Ensure TUPE law 2 2 4 L implement new complied with and operating employment policies. module leads to employment law issues. 5 Encourage Take great care in 2 2 4 L more use of city balancing budget centre car parks needs of Council with and cause wider implications. congestion. Monitoring after charges introduced. 6 Discourage Take great care in 2 2 4 L economic balancing budget activity through needs of Council with change. wider implications. Monitoring after charges introduced. 7 Changes to Ensure sufficient 2 2 4 L operational randomly distributed model leads to patrols to deter crime. increased Enhance surveillance crime. using modernized CCTV. Liaise with police re charges. Monitor crime levels and respond accordingly.
Financial Implications
15. The table set out in Appendix A compares the full year effect of a range of potential fee levels compared with the Council’s budget and the requirements of the Medium Term Financial Strategy. The Strategy provides for an additional £250k above the amount (£250k) that is included in the base budget that was to have been received from the County Council with effect from 1 st April 2012. Hence if no charge is made for parking the deficit to the Council against its Medium Term Financial Plan would be in the order of £1.2million ie. the £500k lost income from the County Council plus the estimated additional cost of operating the services of £674k. A charge of £1 or £1.20 leaves a deficit of around £492k and £357k respectively. A charge of £2 would more than cover the impact on the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan. A charge of £1.50 does not fully recover all costs (of providing the service) but meets the Medium Term Financial Plan requirement, as the costs not being recovered are essentially corporate and departmental overheads which are already borne by the Council; the residual balance of approximately £65k for 2012/13 and the £30k for 2011/12 can be funded through Section 106 income and dilapidations chargeable through the lease to the County Council. A fee of £1.50 would be the lowest level of charging at a convenient round number which will deliver the requirements of the Medium Term Financial Plan and is therefore recommended as the optimum price to be charged.
38
The £1.50 fee derives from modelling costs and income and relies on the following key assumptions:-
• The costs allow for changes in the method of operation which is likely to lead to a reduction in staffing and subsequent redundancy cost of up to £100k which could be met from the severance budget head. • The revised method of operation uses Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) and CCTV technology. With new pay and display machines the estimated capital costs will be around £264k which is not currently included within the Council’s Capital Programme. This will be funded via the S106 Monies as these items are Improvements to the Park and Ride Facilities • The County Council currently hold Section 106 receipts which were previously transferred from the City Council when the car parks were transferred. The estimated amount is likely to be in the region of £788k. It may be possible to use some of these receipts to mitigate running costs such as repairs and maintenance that have been identified to deal with water pooling problems and drainage. • If the new methods of operation are to be brought into effect there are still a number of employee consultations which need to be undertaken which will take time to complete. Should these not be completed before December then the existing staff structure would continue leading to a financial pressure on the 2011/12 budget of around £50k. Officers would need to mitigate this pressure in other areas of the budget .
Given these uncertainties Council officers will need to review the budget position and consider appropriate action as necessary. .
Climate change / environmental impact
16. The introduction of a charge may result in a minority of people to travel into the City centre or parking on street adjacent to park and ride sites or transferring to public transport rather than paying to park at the park and ride sites. This is difficult to estimate however but the adverse effects are judged to be minimal.
Equalities impact
17. As with all of our parking facilities disabled persons parking will continue to be available. It is not anticipated that there will be any differential impact based on race, gender, disability, sex, age, or religion due to this policy.
Action taken under officer delegated powers
18. There is a Parking Place Order already in force for the sites as the Order was not cancelled when the sites were transferred to the County Council. Car park charges can be altered by issuing a 21 day ‘notice of intent’ to change the charge. Acting under delegated authority, officers have issued a notice of intent to change the existing charge from zero to £1.50 (and a
39
related charge of £100 reduced to £50 for prompt payment in respect of non- display of a ticket or overstaying the time purchased. Whilst we have set out the proposed methods of payment in paragraphs 10 – 12, the current Order (which was made in 1998) does not provide for those methods of payment. It simply requires the motorist to purchase a ticket from the ticket machine and to display it on the vehicle. Alterations need therefore to be made to the Order. These alterations cannot be made by notice of intent. Again acting under delegated authority officers have advertised the variation to the Order to introduce the changes in the method of payment.
Legal Implications
19. There is no impediment in the lease or covenants relating to this land which would prevent the introduction of the changes to car park controls referred to in this report.
20. TUPE legislation will apply to the transfer of staff to the City Council. Relevant legislation and Council policy in respect of such matters will be followed and the proposed changes can be accommodated within those.
Name and contact details of author: -
Name Time Sadler Job title Executive Director City Services Service Area / Department Tel: 01865 252101 e-mail: [email protected]
List of background papers: The City of Oxford (Park and Ride Parking Places) Order 1998 Version number: 4
40
Appendix 1
Table showing impact of a range of fees in balancing the Council’s budget position in a full year based on 2012/13
PARK & RIDE @ @ @ Charging Options £1.00 £1.20 £1.50 @ £2.00
Income Charge incl VAT 1.00 1.20 1.50 2.00 Charge Net of VAT 0.83 1.00 1.25 1.67 Total Income (£) 681,287 816,704 973,665 1,189,102
Expenditure (£) Direct Costs (employee, premises,transport,supplies) 539,551 539,551 539,551 539,551 Support services and other overheads 134,031 134,031 134,031 134,031 Sub Total Direct Costs 673,582 673,582 673,582 673,582
Lost Income 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000
Net Position Compared to MTFS Deficit/(Surplus) 492,295 356,877 199,916 (15,521)
Table Showing impact of range of fees in balancing council’s budget position for 2011/12
Park & Ride
Charging Options @ £1.00 @ £1.20 @ £1.50 @ £2.00
Income Charge incl VAT 1.00 1.20 1.50 2.00 Charge Net of VAT 0.83 1.00 1.25 1.67 Total Income (£) 336,105 402,486 479,428 585,034
Expenditure (£) Direct Costs (employee, premises,transport,supplies) 382,917 382,917 382,917 382,917 Support services and other overheads 67,015 67,015 67,015 67,015 Sub Total Direct Costs 449,932 449,932 449,932 449,932
Lost Income 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000
Net Position Compared to MTFS Deficit/(Surplus) 238,827 172,445 95,504 (10,102)
41
This page is intentionally left blank
42 Agenda Item 12 Extract from the Minutes of the City Executive Board Held st on 21 September 2011
25. LEISURE CENTRE DEVELOPMENT PLANS - PHASE 2
The Head of Leisure and Parks submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) seeking approval to progress Phase two leisure centre improvement works.
Resolved to:-
1) Grant project approval to Phase two of the leisure centre improvement works;
2) Approve the business case for Phase two;
3) To RECOMMEND Council that a capital budget in the order of £700,000 for the cost of the works be included in the Council’s capital programme funded by prudential borrowing and to note that the revenue costs of financing would be financed from the reduction in the management costs of the Leisure Management Contract referred to in the report;
4) Approve the commencement of preparatory works; and
5) Delegate authority to the Executive Director for City Services to award the contract for the works.
26. TRADING STRATEGY
The Executive Director for City Services submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) providing an update on the approach proposed to take forward the proposal contained in the Council 2012 Strategy that the Council sought to optimise income.
Also submitted was a report of the Value and Performance Scrutiny Committee (previously circulated, now appended).
Resolved to:-
1) Approve the overall framework for charging third parties for discretionary services as outlined in this report;
2) Approve the overall framework for the supply of goods and services to other public bodies as outlined in this report;
3) Delegate the decision on whether to enter into arrangements with private sector bodies under which the Council would charge for services provided within or outside the City to the relevant director, provided that the value of such arrangements does not exceed £100,000.
43 4) Delegate the decision on whether to enter into arrangements with other public bodies under which the Council would provide goods and/or services to such other public bodies within or outside the city to the relevant director, provided that the value of such arrangements does not exceed £100,000.
5) To agree the recommendations of the Value and Performance Scrutiny Committee namely:-
(a) Should the Council wish to go beyond the arrangements already in existence to reconsider the governance arrangements proposed within the strategy.
(b) When considering the use of spare capacity to undertake trading activities the relative options, risks and returns need to be fully documented in order to make an informed decision.
(c) To provide a report in years time showing: - The services sold or traded - The amount of money raised - The effects of this within our budget identifying specifically, if possible, where this has allowed us to reduce the costs of services within our budget
27. GRANTS 2010-2011 - MONITORING FEEDBACK
The Head of Housing and Communities submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) that presented monitoring information returned by community and voluntary organisations awarded a grant in 2010/2011.
Resolved to note the report.
28. FUTURE ITEMS
Nothing was raised under this item.
29. MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting held on 22 June 2011 and the special meeting held on 21 July 2011 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
30. MATTERS EXEMPT FROM PUBLICATION
Without going into confidential session, the Board received and noted the contents of a not for publication appendix to the report at item 10 (minute 34 refers).
The meeting started at 5.00 pm and ended at 5.52 pm 44
To: City Executive Board
Date: 21 September 2011
Report of: Head of City Leisure & Parks
Title of Report: Phase two leisure centre works
Summary and Recommendations
Purpose of report : To seek approval to progress phase two leisure centres improvement works.
Key decision? Yes Executive lead member: Councillor Van Coulter
Report approved by: Tim Sadler
Finance: Val Craddock Legal : Lindsay Cane Procurement : Nicky Atkins
Policy Framework: • Stronger, active communities • Efficient, effective council
Recommendation(s ):
1. That project approval is given to phase two of the leisure centre improvement works.
2. That the business case for phase two is approved and that a bid to the council’s capital budget is made in October.
3. That approval is given to commence preparatory works.
4. That delegated authority is given to the executive director for city services to award the works contracts.
45
1 1. Introduction
1.1 In May 2009 the City’s Executive Board agreed the Leisure Facilities Review. It detailed an approach to developing a sustainable leisure offer by reducing the number of our leisure facilities and improving the quality of the remaining centres so they have a wider appeal.
1.2 Since March 2009 the city’s leisure centres have been operated by Fusion Lifestyle, who are a social enterprise with charitable status.
1.3 In October 2010 phase one of the improvement works were completed which have witnessed an annual increase of 98,000 visits to our leisure centres, with a disproportionately high number of these visits being from our target groups.
1.4 The attached business case details what are termed “phase two” works which will continue to improve the quality of the city’s leisure offer.
1.5 By investing in leisure centres the council is achieving a good return on its capital, alongside achieving its corporate objectives and as the property owner the council retains the residual asset value derived from the investment.
2 Phase Two Developments
Phase two developments will take place at the following sites: • Ferry Sports Centre • Blackbird Leys Leisure Centre • Oxford Ice Rink • Barton Pool.
2.1 Ferry Leisure Centre
The first phase of capital investment at the centre has proved very successful with significant growth in participation and membership numbers at the site. The aim of the second phase capital developments is to address and capitalise on the continued and increasing demand for a broader fitness offering by providing additional group exercise studio space and flexibility. In addition, it is proposed that works will be undertaken to the entrance/foyer areas in order to improve the first impression for customers, to help to address current reception congestion problems and to provide additional facilities/services designed to encourage use of the facility by the whole family.
46
2 With these aims in mind, the key elements of the development proposals are as follows:
• creation of a dedicated spin studio by conversion of one of the remaining squash courts • reconfiguration of the existing entrance, foyer and office areas to create simple café and soft play facilities.
2.2. Oxford Ice Rink
Fusion are confident that the Ice Rink has significant potential and represents both a great opportunity and a fundamental part of the City’s high quality leisure portfolio. The key elements of the development proposals are as follows:
• improvement to the first floor areas, including entrance, foyer, reception, circulation, café and meeting rooms, so as to create a high quality and attractive customer offer. • creation of additional multi-purpose/meeting space. • improvements to the external décor and signage.
2.3. Blackbird Leys Leisure Centre
Fusion’s original tender incorporated plans to undertake the resurfacing and refurbishment of the existing outdoor tennis courts so as to enable multi-use activity, including floodlit five-a-side football. While not prioritised in Phase One of the works, it is a key element of the Second Phase of works and complements the planned development of the Competition Standard Pool on the site.
2.4 Barton Leisure Centre
The construction of the fitness suite at the Barton Pool has significantly increased participation and income generation at the site and has created a more complete and coherent offer to the users and prospective new users. This successful development will be added to with the introduction of indoor “spin” cycling. Fusion will purchase the required equipment and a small store in the existing studio will be constructed so as enable safe and secure storage of kit when it is not in use.
3. The overall objectives of the proposals are to:
• Further the aspiration of delivering World Class leisure services. • Have a positive impact on participation in sport and physical activity within the City, both by the general population and by members of target groups.
47
3 • Increase the sustainability of the facility portfolio by facilitating increased income and reducing ongoing net subsidy requirements.
4. Level of Risk
The works are relatively straight forward and pose a minimal level of risk, these risks are covered in the risk register in appendix one.
5. Climate change / environmental impact
5.1 While the works will lead to more people using the centres both Fusion and the Council continue to encourage access by public transport, or by none vehicular methods to reduce the carbon impact.
5.2 The building works will be undertaken using considerate construction practices.
6. Equalities Impact
6.1 The developments will be fully accessible and in line with all our leisure facilities they will continue to be offered at concessionary rates to those qualifying for benefits and their dependents.
7. Financial Impact
7.1 There will be a benefit in the reduction in the management fee from the development above and beyond the repayment of the capital. The detail is included as a confidential appendix as negotiations with Fusion are still underway and the level of detail involved is commercially sensitive.
7.2 The Council also benefit from a contract wide profit share which sees the Council retaining the majority of any contract surpluses.
7.3 The Council’s Corporate Asset Management Group support the business case but feel that the scheme should be weighed against all other capital schemes that may emerge from the initial stages of the 2012/13 budget setting process. However, the Corporate Management Team took the view that as the prudential borrowing costs would be met from leisure budgets that the scheme can proceed in year.
8. Legal Implications
It is proposed that OCC appoints Fusion as the agent and Fusion then appoints the Project Manager. OCC will then directly appoint the contractor which has the benefit of the council being able to use its VAT exemption.
48
4 Name and contact details of author: Ian Brooke E: [email protected] T: 01865 25 2705
List of background papers: Leisure Facilities Review, May 2009
Version number: 4
49
5
Appendix 1 – Risk Register
Risk Register Relating to: CEB Report – Phase two improvement works Date: September 2011 No. Risk Description Gross Cause of Risk Mitigation Net Further Management of Risk: Monitoring Current Link to Corporate Obj Risk Risk Transfer/Accept/Reduce/Avoid Effectiveness Risk
Risk Score Impact Score : 1 =Insignificant; 2 = Minor; 3 = Moderate; 4 = Major; 5 = Catastrophic Probability Score: 1 = Rare; 2 = Unlikely; 3 = Possible; 4 = Likely; 5 = Almost Certain • Develop a fully costed Action: Reduce Outcome business case (IB, Undertake a risk required : Exclusions not (Sep 2011) workshop with Fusion Accurate costings costed • Finance business (LC, Sept 2011) Milestone Date: partner to sign off the Action Owner: Ian September 2011 The budget is not Risks not costed financials (VC, Aug Brooke 1 3 2 2 2 sufficient 2011) 2 2 An inadequate • A 20% contingency Mitigation
50 contingency utilised (IB, Aug 2011) Control Owner: Ian • The risk is transferred Brooke / Lucy Cherry to Fusion ( IB, Sep 2011) Action: Reduce Outcome Utilise a project required : Utilise a project management An clear, agreed Project roles not management methodology project plan in understood methodology – JB, Aug (IB, Sept 2011) place Works not completing 2011 Action Owner: IB, Aug Milestone Date: 2 3 3 2 2 on time Milestones not clear 2011 September 2011 2 2 A budget bid to Budget not agreed October’s council – IB, Mitigation Aug 2011 Control Owner: Ian Brooke / Lucy Cherry
6 Agenda Item 13 CITY EXECUTIVE BOARD
Wednesday 21 September 2011
COUNCILLORS PRESENT: Councillors Turner (Vice-Chair), Cook, Coulter, Lygo, McManners, Smith and Tanner.
25. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Councillors Price and Timbs.
26. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
No declarations of interest were made.
27. PUBLIC QUESTIONS
Written questions with answers were distributed at the start of the meeting. These are appended to the minutes.
28. SCRUTINY COMMITTEE REPORTS
The Value and Performance Scrutiny Committee submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) making recommendations concerning the Trading Strategy report (minute 35 refers).
Resolved to thank the Committee for its input and accept the recommendations in the report.
29. OPERATION OF PARK AND RIDE SITES
The Executive Director for City Services submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) setting out proposals for changes to the management of the Council’s three Park and Ride sites in a way that met the requirements of the City Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy.
Councillor Turner confirmed the view of many Councillors that it was regrettable but unavoidable to reintroduce charging at the City’s three park and ride sites. The charge, he added, was being proposed to cover the City council’s running costs of the sites and would not be a method of income generation.
The Board was addressed by Councillor Fooks who referred the issues of partnership working between the City and County Councils.
Resolved
1) That taking into account the requirements of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy and the savings provided by different working arrangements to agree that a parking charge of £1.50 per 51 day should be introduced at the Redbridge, Seacourt and Pear tree Park and Ride Sites within the City of Oxford;
2) To note that the necessary steps were being taken to make a variation Order to give effect to the changes in the method of payment as set out in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the report and to season tickets and other concessions that might be agreed by the Director for City Services in consultation with the Board Member; and
3) To RECOMMEND Council to agree a capital budget in the order of £264,000 for the purchase of equipment required to operate the service, financed from Section 106 receipts.
30. TREASURY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - 2010/11 OUTTURN
The Head of Finance submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) setting out the Council’s treasury management activity for 2010/11, together with its achievement against prudential indicator targets for 2010/11.
Resolved to note the Treasury Management Annual Report for 2010/11.
31. QUARTERLY REPORTING - FINANCE, PERFORMANCE AND RISK - 2011/12
The Head of Finance and the Head of Business Improvement submitted reports (previously circulated, now appended) reporting on the position for Finance, Performance and Risk during the first quarter of the financial year.
Resolved to note the current position on finance, corporate performance measures and risk for the first quarter of 2011/12.
32. LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME 2010-2014
The Head of City Development submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) seeking approval for a three-year programme for the preparation of various planning documents that would form part of the City Council’s Local Development Framework.
The Planning Policy Manager reported that since the agenda had been published brief comments from the Planning Inspectorate and West Oxfordshire District Council had been received but these did not alter the recommendations in the report.
Resolved to:-
(1) Approve the Oxford Local Development Scheme 2011-14 for submission to the Secretary of State;
52 (2) Agree that the Local Development Scheme 2011-14 would take effect four weeks after submission unless the Secretary of State intervened and requested more time or more work to be done; and
(3) Authorise the Head of City Development to make any necessary editorial corrections to the document prior to submission to the Secretary of State.
33. DISCRETIONARY HOUSING PAYMENTS
The Head of Customer Services submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) requesting additional Discretionary Housing Payment funding, and to approval of the new Discretionary Housing Payments Policy.
Resolved to:-
1) Provide £34,000 from the Homeless Contingency Budget as funding for Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP), allowing the Council to spend the maximum amount on DHP permitted by regulations and ensuring that the maximum number of tenancies can be sustained;
2) Adopt the changes in the Council’s DHP policy outlined in Section 4 of the report and particularly paragraph 4.4 and to agree the amended policy as set out in Appendix 1 to the report;
3) Delegate authority to amend the policy during the year, in order to keep DHP spend within permitted limits, to the Head of Customer Services in conjunction with the Portfolio Holder for Customer Services and the Head of Housing and Communities;
4) Keep the DHP function within the Benefits Service;
5) Ensure the Department of Work and Pensions was informed about the requirement for Oxford to overspend its DHP Grant.
34. LEISURE CENTRE DEVELOPMENT PLANS - PHASE 2
The Head of Leisure and Parks submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) seeking approval to progress Phase two leisure centre improvement works.
Resolved to:-
1) Grant project approval to Phase two of the leisure centre improvement works;
2) Approve the business case for Phase two;
3) To RECOMMEND Council that a capital budget in the order of £700,000 for the cost of the works be included in the Council’s capital programme funded by prudential borrowing and to note that 53 the revenue costs of financing would be financed from the reduction in the management costs of the Leisure Management Contract referred to in the report;
4) Approve the commencement of preparatory works; and
5) Delegate authority to the Executive Director for City Services to award the contract for the works.
35. TRADING STRATEGY
The Executive Director for City Services submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) providing an update on the approach proposed to take forward the proposal contained in the Council 2012 Strategy that the Council sought to optimise income.
Also submitted was a report of the Value and Performance Scrutiny Committee (previously circulated, now appended).
Resolved to:-
1) Approve the overall framework for charging third parties for discretionary services as outlined in this report;
2) Approve the overall framework for the supply of goods and services to other public bodies as outlined in this report;
3) Delegate the decision on whether to enter into arrangements with private sector bodies under which the Council would charge for services provided within or outside the City to the relevant director, provided that the value of such arrangements does not exceed £100,000.
4) Delegate the decision on whether to enter into arrangements with other public bodies under which the Council would provide goods and/or services to such other public bodies within or outside the city to the relevant director, provided that the value of such arrangements does not exceed £100,000.
5) To agree the recommendations of the Value and Performance Scrutiny Committee namely:-
(a) Should the Council wish to go beyond the arrangements already in existence to reconsider the governance arrangements proposed within the strategy.
(b) When considering the use of spare capacity to undertake trading activities the relative options, risks and returns need to be fully documented in order to make an informed decision.
(c) To provide a report in years time showing: - The services sold or traded 54 - The amount of money raised - The effects of this within our budget identifying specifically, if possible, where this has allowed us to reduce the costs of services within our budget
36. GRANTS 2010-2011 - MONITORING FEEDBACK
The Head of Housing and Communities submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) that presented monitoring information returned by community and voluntary organisations awarded a grant in 2010/2011.
Resolved to note the report.
37. FUTURE ITEMS
Nothing was raised under this item.
38. MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting held on 22 June 2011 and the special meeting held on 21 July 2011 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
39. MATTERS EXEMPT FROM PUBLICATION
Without going into confidential session, the Board received and noted the contents of a not for publication appendix to the report at item 10 (minute 34 refers).
The meeting started at 5.00 pm and ended at 5.52 pm
55 This page is intentionally left blank
56 DELEGATED DECISIONS OF THE BOARD MEMBER, CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS
Wednesday 3 August 2011
COUNCILLORS PRESENT: Councillors Price.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Lois Stock (Democratic Services Officer)
1. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Price declared a personal interest in the appointment to the South Oxford Playground (minute 4 refers) as the Chair of this group.
2. PUBLIC ADDRESSES
None
3. COUNCILLOR ADDRESSES
Councillor Royce, in attendance, indicated that she wished to ask questions on the item concerning the Loan Guarantee for Arts at the Old Fire Station. She would ask her questions when this item was reached.
4. APPOINTMENTS TO OUTSIDE BODIES
Lois Stock (Democratic Services Officer) presented the report.
Resolved to approve all recommendations as laid out in the officer’s report with the following additional decisions:-
(1) To ask Angela Cristofoli to arrange a meeting between the Forest of Oxford Steering Group and Councillors Price, Pressel, Fooks and a representative from the Liberal Democrat group, for a time to be agreed in the autumn, in order to look at issues raised by Councillor Fooks in her feedback on this group;
(2) To ask Angela Cristofoli to arrange a meeting between the Oxford Asian Cultural Association and Councillors Price, Bance and a representative from the Liberal Democrat group in order to discuss issues around this group;
(3) To ask Angela Cristofoli to arrange a meeting between the Wood Farm Community Association, at the same time as the one above, and involving the same Councillors;
57 (4) To make the following appointments:-
District Councils Network Assembly Councillor Ed Turner, Councillor Van Coulter as sub
APSE Councillor Coulter at present, but to remain open to opposition nomination if one is made
CCTV Management Committee Cllr Timbs
Children and Young People’s Board Councillor Bance
English Heritage South East Region Councillor Cook
Environmental Protection UK Councillor Tanner
Health and Well Being Partnership Councillor Bance
LGIU Councillor Darke, Councillor Wilkinson as sub Oxford Strategic Partnership Councillor Price
OXSRAD Cllr Altaf-Khan
Oxford Safer Communities Councillor Timbs Partnership Oxford Sports Council Councillor Lygo
OCVA Councillor Bance
Oxfordshire Members Affordable Councillor McManners Housing Group
Oxfordshire Waste Partnership Joint Councillor Tanner Committee South East Employers Councillor Price
Pathways Project Councillor Seamons
East Oxford Community Association Councillors Morton and Jones Management Committee City of Oxford Charity To replace Councillor Price with Mr Steve Curran
Elder Stubbs Charity Ms Harley (for appointment expiring in October 2011)
Katherine Rawson Trust Councillor Goddard (for appointment expiring in October 2011)
Oxford Leon Trust Councillors Tanner and Williams (for 58 appointments expiring in August 2011)
(5) To make all other appointments as detailed in the report;
(6) To delete the following outside bodies as no longer operating;
• Local Strategic Partnership Steering Group (now the Oxford Strategic Partnership) • Oxford Community Local Strategic Partnership; • Oxfordshire Supporting People Commissioning Body; • Blackbird Leys Adventure Playground Management Committee
(A complete list of all appointments is attached to these minutes.)
5. OLD FIRE STATION - GUARANTOR FOR LOAN
Councillor Price explained the background to this item.
In answer to questions from Councillor Royce concerning the risk of this group defaulting on the loan, Councillor Price indicated that he was satisfied that the Council would be able to keep a careful track of this group’s finances and that the risk, as assessed by officers, was small. Should the Council need to intervene, there was provision to do so via Laura Worsfold (Culture Team Leader) and Councillors.
Resolved to agree
(1) That Oxford City Council will, in principle, act as guarantor for a loan facility of up to £115, 000 to be supplied by a social investment bank to Arts at the Old Fire Station;
(2) That authority be delegated to the Corporate Director of Finance and Efficiency to enter into an appropriate arrangement with the lender on terms that comply with the content of the officer’s report.
6. MATTERS EXEMPT FROM PUBLICATION
None
The meeting started at 5.00 pm and ended at 5.30 pm
59 This page is intentionally left blank
60 DELEGATED DECISIONS OF THE BOARD MEMBER, CITY DEVELOPMENT
Monday 8 August 2011
COUNCILLORS PRESENT: Councillor Cook.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Martin Armstrong (City Development), Andrew Bradfield- Barnes (Parking Manager) and Lois Stock (Democratic Services Officer)
1. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None.
2. PUBLIC ADDRESSES
None
3. COUNCILLOR ADDRESSES
Councillors Alan Armitage, Jean Fooks and John Goddard attended to speak on agenda item 5 – Car Parks Adjacent to Parks.
Councillor Cook agreed that they could speak when this item was reached.
4. CONFIRMATION OF ARTICLE 4 DIRECTION ON HOUSES IN MULTIPLE OCCUPATION
Resolved to confirm the Article 4 Direction controlling the change of use of C3 dwelling houses to C4 Houses in Multiple Occupation.
5. CAR PARKS ADJACENT TO PARKS - CHARGING, PERMITS AND CONTROL OF USE
With the agreement of Councillor Cook, Councillors Alan Armitage, Jean Fooks and John Goddard made the following points:-
• There was local concern, especially from users of Cutteslowe Park, that the proposals would go ahead regardless; • People appreciated that there were proposals to provide season tickets, but there was still concern that car parking would be displaced into the surrounding streets. It was important to monitor this; • The proposal seemed disruptive for a small financial return; • Godstow Road car park was on common land and therefore charges could not be made;
61 • There were concerns that people parking at Walton Well Road car park would be forbidden from returning within 24 hours. This should be reduced or even abandoned altogether; • People using Cripley Meadow allotments need good access that was wide enough for cars and other vehicles – could a discussion take place with the allotment holders on this? • Councillor John Goddard added that the Secretary of State had the power to decide what might happen around Port Meadow.
Councillor Cook responded as follows:-
• There would be monitoring of any displacement around Godstow Road; • The proposed scheme was necessary because of the Council’s budget constraints; • There was no change of use at Godstow Road car park. It was staying as a car park. The only alteration was in charging to park there; • The comments about the 24 hour “no return” for the Walton Well road Car Park and about Port Meadow were noted; • Councillor Cook had been in prolonged contact with allotment holders and hoped to address concerns about car parking.
Resolved:-
(1) As far as the proposal to introduce charges at the Godstow Road car park were concerned:
(a) To ask officers to check and confirm that there was no legal impediment to charging for parking in areas adjacent common land;
(b) Assuming that there was no legal impediment, officers were asked to progress with consultation concerning charging for parking on the Godstow Road site;
(c) Officers were asked to gather further evidence of the usage of the Godstow Road site and that when carrying out consultation, officers were asked to consult widely with the wider community, including Ward Members, the Wolvercote Commoners, Freemen and any amenity societies associated with Port Meadow;
(2) As far as the proposal to introduce charges at the Marsh Road car park was concerned that this not be proceeded with because the Board Member did not consider that the finances for this proposal were clear; It was not known what the level of City Council usage would be; a proper travel plan for City Council staff travelling to the site should first be produced, and a consultation concerning the number of permits required for this site, and the price of these permits for City Council staff, be carried out, and that this should be reported back by means of a future report for consideration by the Board Member;
(3) As far as all of the other car parks adjacent to City Parks were concerned:
62 (a) That the proposed charges be introduced as advertised with an initial implementation date of 1 st September (although it was acknowledged that this may be pushed backwards);
(b) Delegate to officers in consultation with the Board Member the authority to determine an appropriate protocol for the issuing of permits and that amenity groups should be informed of the method of application for parking permits and this information should be displayed on notices within the car parks as well.
(c) That the proposals should be amended to forbid return within 3 hours as opposed to the suggested 24 hours.
6. MATTERS EXEMPT FROM PUBLICATION
None
The meeting started at 5.00 pm and ended at 5.22 pm
63 This page is intentionally left blank
64 DELEGATED DECISIONS OF THE BOARD MEMBER, FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Monday 15 August 2011
COUNCILLORS PRESENT: Councillors Turner.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Alec Dubberley (Democratic Services Officer), Nicky Atkin and Jackie Yates (Corporate Director Finance and Efficiency)
5. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
No declarations of interest were made at this meeting.
6. PUBLIC ADDRESSES
To Councillor addresses were made to the meeting.
7. COUNCILLOR ADDRESSES
8. CAR PARK SECURITY - CONTRACT AWARD
Resolved to:-
1) Note that the living wage will apply
2) Grant project approval for the supply of car park security.
3) Delegate authority to the Director for City Services to enter into the new car park security contract.
9. CIVIL ENGINEERING GOODS AND SERVICES - CONTRACT AWARD
Resolved to:-
1) Grant project approval for the provision of civil engineering works.
2) Delegate authority to the Executive Director for City Services to enter into the new engineering works contracts.
10. MATTERS EXEMPT FROM PUBLICATION
The meeting started at Time Not Specified and ended at 5.05 pm
65 This page is intentionally left blank
66 DELEGATED DECISIONS OF THE BOARD MEMBER, HOUSING NEEDS
Thursday 18 August 2011
COUNCILLORS PRESENT: Councillors McManners.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Alec Dubberley (Democratic Services Officer) and Chris Pyle (Housing Projects Manager)
1. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None made
2. PUBLIC ADDRESSES
None received
3. COUNCILLOR ADDRESSES
None received
4. 20 ALDRICH ROAD
The Head of Corporate Assets submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) seeking approval to erect a single storey rear extension for a disabled person.
Resolved to approve the use of the Aids and Adaptations budget for the erection of a rear extension at 20 Aldrich Road for the existing disabled tenant at an estimated cost of £41,403, and otherwise on terms to be agreed by the Head of Corporate Assets.
The meeting started at 2.00 pm and ended at 2.10 pm
67 This page is intentionally left blank
68 DELEGATED DECISIONS OF THE BOARD MEMBER, FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Wednesday 7 September 2011
COUNCILLORS PRESENT: Councillor Turner.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Alec Dubberley (Democratic Services Officer), Chris Cocks (Corporate Assets), Steve Sprason (Head of Corporate Assets) and Jane Winfield (Corporate Assets)
11. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
No declarations of interest were made at the meeting.
12. PUBLIC ADDRESSES
No public addresses were made.
13. COUNCILLOR ADDRESSES
No addresses from Councillors were received.
14. BMW PURCHASE OPTION FOR LAND AT HORSPATH ROAD
The Head of Corporate Assets submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) seeking approval to grant an option to BMW (UK) Manufacturing Limited on land at Horspath Road/Oxford Road, Cowley.
Resolved to:-
1) Agree to an option agreement with BMW for land off Horspath Road and Oxford Road, Cowley, as detailed in this report and otherwise on terms and conditions to be approved by the Head of Corporate Assets.
2) Ask that the Head of Corporate Assets continues the positive dialogue with BMW in the hope of addressing the concerns about parking raised by Grenoble Road residents.
15. HARCOURT HOUSE
The Head of Corporate Assets submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) seeking authority to enter into a joint promotional agreement to bring the Harcourt House site forward for development.
Resolved to:- 69 1) Give approval to enter into a Joint Promotional Agreement as described in this report, and otherwise on terms and conditions to be approved by the Head of Corporate assets.
2) Note that the City Council will enter into a lease of the existing Harcourt House car park for a period of up to 2 years for the provision of temporary car parking.
3) Note the intention to agree a variation to the existing Harcourt House lease as described herein.
16. BARTON NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE - PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS
The Head of Corporate Assets submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) seeking authority to grant a lease to Barton Community Association to allow the Association to install Photovoltaic panels on the roof of the Barton Neighbourhood Centre.
Resolved to:-
1) Approve the principle of a disposal at less than the best consideration as detailed in the report.
2) Approve the granting of a lease of part of the roof space at Barton Neighbourhood Centre to enable the installation of Photovoltaic panels as detailed in the report, and otherwise on terms and conditions to be approved by the Head of Corporate Assets.
3) Note the importance of the project and the tight deadlines required to move it forward.
17. APPROVAL TO PROPOSED LETTING OF 33-35 GEORGE STREET
The Head of Corporate Assets submitted a report seeking approval for the letting of 33-35 George Street, Oxford.
Resolved:-
1) To agree to the proposed letting of 33-35 George Street, Oxford to Tenant A as detailed in the not for publication Appendix 3 to the report and otherwise on terms and conditions to be approved by the Head of Corporate Assets.
2) In the event that terms cannot be agreed with Tenant A, that a letting to Tenant B proceed on the terms as set out in the not for publication Appendix 3 to the report and otherwise on terms and conditions to be approved by the Head of Corporate Assets.
18. MATTERS EXEMPT FROM PUBLICATION
70 Resolved , without moving in to confidential session, to note the not for publication appendices submitted for items 5 and 7.
The meeting started at 5.00 pm and ended at 5.15 pm
71 This page is intentionally left blank
72 Agenda Item 17
To: Council
Date: 10 th October 2011 Item No:
Report of: Head of Law and Governance
Title of Report: PETITIONS SCHEME – NO CONFIDENCE IN OUR LABOUR COUNCIL
Summary and Recommendations
Purpose of report : To advise on the procedure that Council needs to follow under the Council’s Petitions Scheme in respect of large petitions, and to provide information specifically on the petition entitled ‘No Confidence in our Labour Council’.
Report Approved by:
Finance: Legal: Jeremy Thomas
Policy Framework: N/A
Recommendation(s): Council is RECOMMENDED to follow the procedure for large petitions in the Council’s Petitions Scheme by hearing the head petitioner for the petition entitled “No Confidence in Our Labour Council” and to then debate the petition and decide how to proceed.
1. A petition entitled “No Confidence in Our Labour Council” was handed in at the full Council meeting on 11 th July 2011. The petition contains 1,637 signatures. The petition reads as follows:-
“We the undersigned are concerned that Oxford City Council has ignored the largest ever petition in Oxford, which called on the council not to close Temple Cowley Swimming Pool and Fitness Centre, and is continuing to pursue its plans to sell the Temple Cowley Swimming Pool land (for Oxford Brookes University student accommodation?) in direct opposition to this demonstration of democratic will. As a result we have lost confidence in the Labour administration running Oxford City Council, and call on all the labour councillors to resign immediately”.
73 D:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\0\5\9\AI00000950\$ncqdv20h.doc
2. Council adopted a Petitions Scheme (as required by the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009) in July 2010. The scheme says that petitions containing over 1,500 signatures will be debated by full Council. The 2009 Act says that in order for signatures on a petition to count they must give the signatories name and address and those people so signing must live, work or study in the authority’s area. A sufficient number of signatures to achieve the 1,500 mark have accompanying names and addresses. It is not of course possible to check whether any signatories from outside Oxford work or study in the City.
3. Our Petitions Scheme says that the petition organiser will be given five minutes at Council to present the petition and that Council will then debate the petition. Where the issue is one on which the Council’s Executive is responsible for reaching the final decision, the Council will decide whether to make recommendations to inform that decision. The petition, the subject of this report is not one for the Executive to consider.
4. Council is being recommended to follow the procedure for large petitions in the Council’s Petitions Scheme and decide how it wishes to proceed.
Name and contact details of author:
William Reed Democratic Services Manager Oxford City Council Blue Boar Street Town Hall Oxford OX1 4EY Tel 01865 252230 Email address [email protected]
Background papers: None
Version number: 1
74 D:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\0\5\9\AI00000950\$ncqdv20h.doc
Agenda Item 18
17. MOTIONS ON NOTICE
(1) Council Tax Benefit – (Proposer – Councillor Ed Turner)
Council notes with regret and alarm the consultation on cuts to council tax benefit. Council believes that the cut - which will amount to nearly 20% in the council tax benefit of working-age recipients - represents an appalling indifference to the plight of people on low incomes (including many disabled people and those with children) and will be damaging to the aim of reducing child poverty, in Oxford and elsewhere.
Council expresses concern that local authorities are being incentivised to reduce benefits and spend funding elsewhere, and believes this could lead to a highly damaging 'race to the bottom' in levels of provision. Council also expresses concern at the significant expense likely to be associated in chasing small amounts of money from those on low incomes, and at the significant extra complexity which will be introduced into the benefits system at a time when simplification is the government's stated aim.
Council notes that in the past politicians have expressed concern at a perceived unfairness in the council tax system, and finds it an act of gross political hypocrisy that these same politicians are now massively increasing the council tax burden upon the very poorest in our society.
Council asks the Chief Executive to draft a strongly-worded letter to Ministers on this subject, to be signed by himself and any group leaders who are willing.
(2) Universal Credit Delivery Arrangements – (Proposer – Councillor Ed Turner)
Council notes that the Government has indicated that benefits for those of working age are to be merged into the Universal Credit. Council expresses concern that this is associated with enormous reductions in the DWP's overall budget, meaning the transition is likely to exacerbate poverty. Council further expresses concern that administration of the new combined benefit may be entirely with the DWP, and will not offer vulnerable claimants the personal service that they receive from Oxford City Council and other local authorities. Council believes it is unacceptable to expect vulnerable claimants to rely on the internet and telephone alone to make claims, and that the proposed transitional arrangements, with two systems operating in parallel, run a great risk of becoming a fiasco.
Council expresses its anxiety that the shift to Universal Credit will threaten jobs at Oxford City Council, without any guarantee of a place in the DWP for our staff, nor for financial recompense for the Council.
75 Council asks the Chief Executive to write to the Welfare Reform Minister, Lord Freud, on these matters, and to seek the support of all groups leaders willing to sign the letter.
(3) Oxford City Council Housing in Multiple Occupation (HMO) Policy - (Proposer – Councillor Joe McManners)
Council recognises that Oxford City Council had a longstanding desire to tackle the poor standards and problems found in the Private Rental Sector (PRS). Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) are known from survey work to have some of the poorest conditions in the sector. Council notes that Oxford City Council (OCC) lobbied for powers to extend HMO licensing beyond mandatory licensing (which is 3 or more stories and 5 or more unrelated residents); that when the power to license all HMOs was granted, OCC has been one of the first councils to use these powers; that our scheme started in January and is in two phases, starting with the larger HMOs, particularly those with previous problems.
Council further notes that the aims of the schemes are to improve standards for tenants, to provide a way of regulating previously unaccountable landlords and to make sure problematic HMOs for neighbours can be tackled. Council believes that by licensing all HMOs, it can be sure that landlords will have a level playing field and that action can and should be taken against any that try to avoid licensing.
Council notes that enforcement work against landlords continues alongside this scheme and the two strands are mutually reinforcing. Council is proud that Oxford City Council is one of the leading local authorities in England with a sound record of vigorous enforcement against bad landlords.
This Council therefore resolves:
(1) To reiterate its complete support for the work the officers are getting on with by licensing all HMOs.
(2) That the HMO licensing scheme as it stands is one that we believe will improve standards for tenants
(3) That HMOs are an important part of the PRS and the Council’s priority needs to remain driving up standards universally across the sector so that rogue landlords will no longer have any place in Oxford.
76
(4) Sustainable Purpose Built Student Accommodation - (Proposer - Councillor Antonia Bance)
Council welcomes the remarkable contribution that our two world- class universities make to Oxford, and the vast range of benefits that they bring to the local economy, and to the social and cultural life of our city. Council endorses the established Local Plan/Core Strategy policy of seeking to reduce the number of students who live in the private rented sector by increasing the amount of purpose-built student housing in the city, and believes that this policy, along with the implementation of tougher regulation of the private rented sector, will bring benefits to the whole community.
Council asks the Executive to increase the efforts that it is already making to encourage the construction of further purpose-built student housing in appropriate and sustainable locations and to ensure that future policies and planning documents recognise the extensive and valuable contribution that students make to our city.
(5) Proposed Electoral Reform - (Proposer - Councillor David Williams)
The Council believes the proposals of the Coalition Government and Boundary Commission with regard to amendments to the Representation of the People Act, notably the scheme to reduce the present Parliamentary representation and the recommendation to alter voter registration from a compulsory household identification to a US style individual voluntary registration on the electoral roll will undermine democratic representation in Oxford.
Council invites the Executive to:-
(a) conclude, on reviewing the recommendations, that reducing the number of MPs from 650 to 600 will result in a less representative Parliament and mean that the local character and opinions of the electoral will be further eroded, lost in much larger constituency structures. Far from increasing the size of constituencies the Executive believes that the City would be better served with a reduction in the number of voters in each constituency in order that Oxford City boundary could encompass two full Parliamentary constituencies;
(b) conclude that the proposal to move to individual voluntary registration will means that large numbers of poor and vulnerable voters will drop off the electoral register in Oxford and could mean up to 10 million voters nationally will no longer be on the electoral rolls,
77
and, depending upon the Executive’s conclusion, to write to the Boundary Commission and the Coalition Government Minister proposing that the changes to the existing legislation do not proceed.
(6) Cornmarket Notice Board - (Proposer - Councillor Nuala Young)
This Council believes that the new rules on leaflet distribution in the City Centre will restrict small voluntary and campaigning organisations who don’t have charitable status and aren’t religious or political from distributing leaflets, stifling their ability to promote fundraising events, public meetings and other activities.
Council therefore invites the Executive to resolve to assist these smaller voluntary and campaigning organisations by providing free a public notice board in Cornmarket similar to those near Oxford Brookes where groups can display posters.
(7) Health and Social Care Bill – (Proposer – Councillor David Williams)
"Oxford City Council believes the Health and Social Care Bill currently before Parliament and in the House of Lords will:
- Significantly increase the portion of Oxfordshire NHS owned and operated in the interests of profit-making corporations.
- Increase costs, fragment services and reduce the quality of care.
- Lead to the closure of NHS hospitals in Oxfordshire.
- Dismantle vital cooperative relationships built over many years.
- Force drastic change on an organisation which requires stability.
- Create increased transaction costs and profits at the expense of patient care.
- Give powers to the Oxfordshire Clinical Consortia to deny care, close services, introduce charges and top-up fees and sell private insurance.
- Remove the Secretary of State’s duty to provide a Health Service free at the point of use.
- Leave Oxfordshire NHS unprotected against the full impact of European Union competition laws by removing the public service exclusion clause.
- Remove the cap on the number of private patients NHS Hospitals in Oxfordshire can treat, thus denying care to NHS patients
78
For these reasons this Council resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write forthwith to the Government spokesperson in the House of Lords to consider these issues and decide to:-
(a) Call upon all members of the House of Lords, regardless of Party affiliation, to reject the Health and Social Care Bill;
(b) Explore the reasons behind the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Nurses opposition to this Bill;
(c) Take into account the general level of opposition by the public to the privatisation of the NHS."
(8) Means tests for Councillors – (Proposer – Councillor Stuart Craft)
This Council agrees that Councillors with an annual household income exceeding £75,000 have no need to claim their allowance and that this money would be better spent in the interests of the City’s Council Tax payers.
With this in mind, Council agrees to set up a Committee to decide the details of a system of means testing for City Councillors in order to remove the allowance from those councillors with annual incomes exceeding £75,000.
Council requests that those Councillors currently falling into this category voluntarily give up their allowance until a formal system is introduced.
Council also agrees to request that City Councillors who are also County Councillors put forward a motion to the same ends to the County Council.
(9) Resignation of the City Council Leader – (Proposer – Councillor Stuart Craft)
Oxford City Council has engaged in transactions resulting in public land being sold to Oxford Brookes University. Council has also decided a major planning application by Brookes that has received a large amount of opposition from local residents.
Council understands that it would be perfectly reasonable for members of the public to conclude that the Leader of Oxford City Council, Bob Price, has a conflict of interest when dealing with Oxford Brookes as he is a Director at the university.
With this in mind Council agrees, to remove the Leader from office as provided for in paragraph 1.4(c) of the Constitution.
79 (10) Temple Cowley and Blackbird Leys Pools – (Proposer – Councillor Stuart Craft)
If the current plans for a new swimming pool at Blackbird Leys were to go ahead, the land at Temple Cowley along with playing fields (and mature trees) in Blackbird Leys will be lost – probably forever.
As councillors we are entrusted to safeguard the City’s assets for future generations.
With this in mind, this Council asks the Executive to put plans for a new swimming pool at Blackbird Leys on hold until:
(a) An alternative source of funding becomes available other than the proposed funds from the sale of Temple Cowley Pool.
(b) An alternative site for the new pool, which does not encroach on existing playing fields or have a negative effect on neighbouring residents’ lives, is found.
(11) Oxford Transport Strategy and Motorcycles – (Proposer – Councillor Stuart Craft)
Oxfordshire County Council’s Transport Strategy fails to address the benefits of motorcycle use as an alternative to the car. Motorcycles can be a cheap alternative to cars for commuters who live off the main bus routes. Motorcycles take up less road space than cars and can fit through smaller gaps which keeps traffic flowing. Modern bikes are very fuel efficient and are subject to more emission controls (within the EU) than cars. As motorcycles spend less time stationary than other vehicles the engines also run more efficiently. With this in mind, this Council agrees to write to the County Council encouraging councillors to investigate initiatives that would encourage more motorcycle usage across the county. (12) Language Schools – (Proposer – Councillor Nuala Young)
This Council believes that occasional meeting between police representatives and the Oxford language schools reflected in the ‘Language Summit’ need to be formalised on a regular basis and the range of issues discussed widened to include not only security but the behaviour and wellbeing of summer school students .
The Council will seek to re-establish the original ‘Language School Forum’ with full Council officer support. The Forum will seek to bring together all summer school and EFL providers with the intention of establishing a ‘Code of Conduct’ on a range of issues to guide the operation of language school groups and their activities in
80 the City environment and to create a set of quality standards for foreign students studying in the City for short periods of time. A report on how a revived Language School Forum could be reconstituted with the agreed objectives and incorporating all interested parties should be brought to the City Executive Board in the late autumn.
(13) Autumn Revised Budget – (Proposer – Councillor David Williams)
With surpluses in reserves now in excess of £5.2 million, the Council believes that now is the time to reassess the Annual budget for 2011- 2012 with a mid term Budget Review with appropriate amendments to the Councils spending plans.
Oxford City Council adopts the amended budget as set out below. The Council will retain £3.4 million as a prudent reserve and spend £1.8 million on the identified themes as set out below within the remaining financial year.
£1000's 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 (half year)
Additional Savings Limit SRA allowance on CEB to five Councillors and -22.5 -45 -45 -45 reduce remainder by £2k each Further energy savings and income from grants and 0 -10 -10 -15 advice to external organisations Increase parking charges in line with inflation (2% more 0 0 0 0 than assumed in base budget) Increase taxi licensing fees in line with inflation (2% 0 -13 -13 -13 more than assumed in base) Increase Planning fees in line with inflation (2% more 0 -3 -3 -3 than assumed in base) Increase Licensing fees in line with inflation (2% more 0 -10 -10 -10 than assumed in base) Revise down senior staff no.s/salaries to reflect reduced -50 -200 -200 -200 budgets & responsibilities
Abandon sale of St Clement Car Park 0 -60 -60 -60 Increase incomes from property by 0.5% over 4 years 0 0 0 0 income from solar feedin tariff -10 -40 -40 -40 Take out £1500 per member in exchange for area cttee budget -36 -72 -72 -72
Total additional savings -118.5 -453 -453 -458 Cumulative additional savings -118.5 -571.5 -1024.5 -1482.5
81 Additional costs Additional pru borrowing costs on lost capital receipt from St Clements car park 115 224 219 213 additional part -time sustainability officer 10 20 20 20 reinstate area committee budgets, area planning & 101 202 202 202 staffing Prudential borrowing on other capital investment of 25 49 48 46 £500k keep Temple Cowley Pool open 113 159 159 159 reinstate free green waste collection 74.5 214 279 279 new fund-raising officer 25 50 50 50
Total additional costs 463.5 918 977 969
Net effect on budget in-year 345 465 524 511 Cumulative effect on budget 345 810 1334 1845
Alternative budget transfer to/(from) reserves -345 -465 -524 -511
Alternative Budget Net Budget Requirement 0 0 0.0 0.0
Green Group amendment to
Capital Budget
2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 £000'S £000'S £000'S £000'S
CAPITAL PROGRAM AS PER CEB 9TH FEBRUARY 28,777 13,677 13,480 12,295
SAVINGS Pool extn to BBL leisure centre 7,365 500 0 0 Rephasing of buildings refurbishment programme (5 years not 4) 500 500 500
ADDITIONAL SPENDING buildings & energy improvements to Temple Cowley Pools & Gym 3,000 0 0 0 investment in solar array (s) on Council buildings 500 0 0 0
REVISED CAPITAL PROGRAM 24,912 12,677 12,980 11,795
FINANCING
FINANCING AS PER CEB REPORT 9TH FEBRUARY 28,777 13,677 13,480 12,295
Savings Savings in Prudential borrowing re competion pool -7000
82 Savings in use of capital receipts re competion pool -365 -500 Savings in use of capital receipts rephasing of refurbishment -500 -500 -500 Additions Additional prudential borrowing re solar arrays 500 Additional prundetial borrowing re Temple Cowley Pool 3000
REVISED CAPITAL FINANCING 24,912 12,677 12,980 11,795
(14) National Planning Framework – (Proposer – Councillor David Williams)
With the Coalition Government launching a consultative period on changes to planning requirements for land development under a new National Planning Policy Framework Oxford City Council would seek to input to that consultation by making the following comment:
The key to new housing development rests with general economic development and change not deregulation. This obvious conclusion was accepted by both the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Parties prior to the last election and neither party proposed radical changes to planning policies. There is therefore no popular mandate for these changes
This Council supports the stance taken by the Campaign for Rural England, the National Trust and the RSPB that revision of the protection of the most fertile farmland as identified in the original Open Green Space Planning Document by a revised code that suggests (paragraph 167) ‘Local Authorities should take into account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land’ is a retrograde step and will effectively lead to a free for all of development on prime agricultural land.
This Council believes that the existing requirements on developers have been built up over many generations to provide a balance between the need to meet housing need and the duty to protect the environment. The structure as it is already provides a positive range of opportunities and great flexibility for developers and to abandon controls that have worked will only lead to further erosion of the Green Belt and green space availability.
The presumptions within the new proposals will shift the emphasis in planning from developing brownfield sites first in preference to prime Greenfield sites. This will mean not only loss of countryside areas but will also undermine urban redevelopment.
Oxford City Council believes that there is an intrinsic value to Greenfield sites not only aesthetically best quality agricultural land will play a critical part in sustainable development providing food in
83 a world of global pressures from climate change and population growth
At the heart of the framework is the weak definition of sustainable development which emphasises the primacy of business and housing development over almost all considerations. Oxford City Council believes, not withstanding having an approved Core Strategy, there will be increased pressures on Oxford's green open spaces, transport system and community facilities from developers being able to suggest that virtually any project is sustainable.
Oxford City Council believes that there is an intrinsic value to Greenfield sites not only aesthetically but because best quality agricultural land will play a critical part in sustainable development providing food in a world of global pressures from climate change and population growth. The Oxford Green Belt also needs strong protection to provide a unique setting to this important historic City.
Oxford City Council calls on the Government not to implement the changes envisaged in the consultative National Planning Framework Document.
(15) Diversity of the Local High Street – (Proposer – Councillor Ruth Wilkinson)
Council notes:
Oxford Residents and traders have expressed concern about the need for a variety of shops in the City Centre, our District Centres and in local neighbourhoods.
Diverse shopping areas, with a healthy representation of small traders, can form an integral part of the social fabric of local communities;
The competitive environment of the high street increasingly tends to produce generic streets populated by chain stores, resulting in “Clone Towns”;
The Localism Bill is designed to give more powers to local councils and local people to shape their neighbourhoods;
Liberal Democrat parliamentarians have tabled an amendment to the Localism Bill – “The Cambridge Amendment” (153AKC) – that would allow councils and the local community to protect the diversity of the local high street by giving councils a new power to take into account whether the business is “independent” or “multiple”.
Labour parliamentarians have tabled an amendment (153AKA) that requires councils to adopt a sequential, “town centre first” approach to development of retail sites in order to stop retail diversity in town centres being harmed by out-of-town developments.
84
Recommendation:
Council requests the Leader to write to both City MPs and to the leaders of all political parties in the House of Lords, asking that they support both these amendments to the Localism Bill.
85 (Additional information to support the Motion)
LORDS AMENDMENT FORM
1 = Clause Clause or Schedule 1 = Before clause Page Line Word 1 = Leave out 2 = Schedule Number 2 = Clause Number Number Number 2 = Leave out and 3 = Preamble 3 = After clause insert 4 = Title 4 = Before schedule 3 = Insert 5 = Schedule 4 = note – CWH only 6 = After schedule
Title and stage of Bill LOCALISM BILL Committee Stage
After Clause 106
LORD GREAVES LORD TOPE
Insert the following new Clause – “Health and diversity of town centres and high streets After section 19 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (preparation of local development documents) insert – “19A Town centres and high streets (1) The duties under section 13 include a requirement to assess the vitality and diversity of the shopping areas in the area. (2) When preparing local development documents and other local planning documents the local planning authority must consider the results of that assessment and consider whether to include appropriate policies to promote the vitality and diversity of those shopping areas. (3) The local planning authority may prepare a scheme for retail vitality and diversity which may be a local development document or other local planning document. (4) Policies set out in documents prepared under subsections (2) and (3) may – (a) define a network of retail centres in the area, (b) assess the existing character and vitality of those retail centres, (c) designate the desired retail mix for each of those retail centres, (d) promote sustainability and diversity in the retail mix that is desired in each case. (5) The local planning authority must consult with the local community when making the assessment under subsections (1) and (2) and deciding whether to adopt policies under subsections (2) and 3). (6) If a planning application is submitted for – (a) a retail use, or
86 (b) a change of use from a retail use, and policies under subsections (2) and (3) are still in preparation, the applicant must provide a statement to the local planning authority that sets out how the development will impact on the criteria identified in paragraph (4)(d) and the local planning authority must consult the local community before coming to a decision. (7) In this section – “local community” includes the traders in each shopping centre; “shopping area” means an area of a town centre or high street where a substantial use is retail; “sustainability and diversity” means that there is an appropriate balance of – (a) independent and multiple traders, (b) unit sizes, and (c) a balances of classes of use.””
LABOUR AMENDMENT 153AKA TO THE LOCALISM BILL
After Clause 105 LORD MCKENZIE OF LUTON LORD BEECHAM LORD PATEL OF BRADFORD 153AKA Insert the following new Clause—
“Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004: retail diversity
After section 15 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (local development scheme) insert—
“15A Retail diversity
(1) The local planning authority must prepare and maintain a scheme to be known as their “retail diversity scheme”.
(2) The retail diversity scheme must form part of the local development scheme within two years of the local development scheme being published or within two years of this Act being passed, whichever is later.
(3) The scheme must—
(a) define a network and hierarchy of retail centres in the local authority area,
(b) assess the need for development in retail centres,
(c) identify sites for development based on the sequential approach, and
(d) promote retail diversity.
87 (4) In this section—
“retail diversity” means a mix of retail provision that meets the requirements of the local catchment area in terms of range and quality of comparison and convenience retail businesses;
“sequential approach” means that local planning authorities must identify sites that are suitable, available and viable for development in the following order—
(a) locations in appropriate existing centres;
(b) edge of centre locations, with preference given to sites that are or will be well connected to existing retail centres; and
(c) out of centre sites with preference given to sites well served by a choice of transport and closest to an existing centre.
(5) The Secretary of State may direct the local planning authority to make such amendments to the scheme as the Secretary of State thinks appropriate.
(6) Any direction given under subsection (5) must include the Secretary of State’s reasons for giving the direction.
(7) The local planning authority must consult the local community in developing the scheme.
(8) The local community to be consulted under subsection (7) must include—
(a) a parish council or parish councils authorised to act in relation to the neighbourhood area or areas to which the retail diversity scheme relates subject to section 61F of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990,
(b) a “qualifying body” authorised to act in relation to the neighbourhood area or areas to which the retail diversity scheme relates subject to section 61F of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and
(c) any other local person at the discretion of the local planning authority.
(9) Where a retail planning application is submitted and there is no retail diversity scheme in place—
(a) the applicant must provide a statement to the local planning authority that sets out how the development impacts on the criteria identified in subsection (3), and
(b) the local planning authority must consult the local community,
before the local planning authority may reach a decision on the application.””
88
(16) Carbon Footprint – (Proposer – Councillors Jean Fooks and Michael Gotch)
Council welcomes the excellent progress that Oxford City Council is making towards reducing the carbon footprint of its own buildings and operations.
However, many planning applications for new buildings or extensions pay no regard to the need to reduce carbon emissions and thereby help to slow climate change. As one-third of UK energy consumption is used in buildings, to heat, cool or light them, it is imperative that we make every effort to reduce this, leading to reduced costs as well as reduced carbon emissions.
Council therefore asks the Planning Department to remind all applicants of the need to minimise the energy use of their buildings and request that information is provided on the estimated carbon emissions of the proposed buildings. This information should be included in Committee reports.
Council further asks the Executive Board member to ensure that all possible steps are taken to make Oxford a leading authority in this respect, before such measures become compulsory in a few years’ time.
89 This page is intentionally left blank
90 Agenda Item 20
Report of: Head of Law and Governance
To: Full Council
Date: 10 th October 2011 I
Title of Report: REVIEW OF POLLING DISTRICTS AND POLLING PLACES
Summary and Recommendations
Purpose of report : To ask Council to approve the schedule of polling districts and polling places (shown at Appendix A) for the administrative area of the City Council as required by the Electoral Administration Act 2006
Key decision: No
Portfolio Holder: Councillor Bob Price
Policy Framework: Not applicable
Recommendation(s): Council is RECOMMENDED to:
(i) approve the Schedule of polling districts and polling places as in Appendix A;
(ii) give the Returning Officer the delegated power to make changes to polling stations in emergencies;
(iii) subsume polling districts GC into GB, KC into KA and ME into MC.
Background
1. The Council is required under the Electoral Administration Act 2006, currently every four years, to carry out a review of the polling places in Oxford used at parliamentary elections. The Act lays out the scope and timetable of the review and suggests who might be consulted and how. For the purposes of this review we are only required to look at places used for the Oxford East parliamentary constituency, but we have taken the opportunity to review those stations used in the Oxford part of the Oxford West and Abingdon parliamentary constituency.
2. The last such review was carried out in 2007.
What the Council needs to do
91
3. The Act requires that the Council must complete the review before 31 st December 2011. But, because of the timing of the publication of the new register for 2012, which must be by 1st December 2011, the review needs to be completed and any changes approved by this meeting of Full Council. This will allow any changes to be implemented on publication of the 2012 register.
4. Interested parties were invited to give comments. These included local disability groups, City and County councillors, local MPs etc. The general public was also invited to comment, via an advert in the local press and an entry in the consultation section of the Council’s website. The Acting Returning Officer for Oxford West and Abingdon constituency (currently David Buckle at Vale of White Horse District Council) was also consulted on those stations in Oxford that form part of the Oxford West and Abingdon constituency.
5. The Act required that the Council look at all aspects of the polling places, location, access and general appropriateness.
Whilst currently the Council is required to carry out a review every four years, under proposals at present being debated in Parliament this requirement would change to five years (in the year before a general election). So, a further review would be necessary in 2014, although the Government accepts that that review (in three years time) would be relatively light touch in view of this year’s review having only recently been completed. The reviews would then proceed on a five-year cycle.
Replies to the consultation
6. Four replies were received to the consultation:
• from the Headteacher at Bayards Hill Primary School, Waynflete Road requesting that we use a different building as closing the school causes significant disruption to the school, pupils and their parents;
• from the Headteacher at Cowley St James School, Bartholomew Road asking that his school not be considered again as a polling station;
• from a member of the public saying that the Cleveland Road area should not vote at Florence Park Community Centre, Cornwallis Road but go to the Silver Band Hall, Temple Road as it was more convenient;
• from the City Labour Group saying it had no comments.
Other Comments:
92
• the Acting Returning Officer for Oxford West and Abingdon constituency wrote to say that he was happy with the polling arrangements in the Oxford West part of his constituency;
• a comment was also made from a disability group questioning how the Council consults and its appropriateness for particular groups. This has been passed to the Council’s Consultation and Access Officers.
Use of Schools
7. The City Council only uses schools where absolutely necessary. We have reduced our use of schools from 13 a decade ago to 9 four years ago to 5 today. At present there are no convenient and suitable alternatives to these 5 schools.
8. The district councils in Oxfordshire have been pressing the County Council to allocate one of its INSET days (two of the five in a school year) to the first Thursday in May. This will not be implemented for 2012 but I am hopeful it will be in place for 2013.
Returning Officer suggestions
9. As a result of the parliamentary boundary changes implemented at the 2010 general election polling districts GC (comprising Trill Mill Court/Salters Brothers Yard/South Bridge Row) and KC (Cowley Place, including St. Hilda’s College) are no longer needed. They were required to enable a by-election to be run under the “old”, pre-2010, boundaries. Prior to 2010, GC was in Oxford East constituency and KC in Oxford West and Abingdon constituency.
They can now be subsumed into GB and KA respectively.
As a result of changes made to the boundary of Littlemore Parish Council, Rose Hill estate no longer needs to be split into two polling districts. I therefore propose to merge polling district ME into MC
Suggested changes
10. In light of the suggestions and other issues I make the following recommendations:
• that the polling station for polling district VD remain at Bayards Hill School – see paragraphs 6 and 7 above
• that polling district GC is subsumed into GB;
• that polling district KC is subsumed into KA;
93
• that the residents of the Cleveland Road area continue to vote at Florence Park Community Centre as to move them to the Silver Band Hall (in a different ward) would cause voter confusion and introduce significant dangers of cross-contamination of ballot papers.
11. I have made the changes suggested above to the schedule contained in Appendix A.
Once agreed by Council the schedule cannot be altered without a subsequent resolution of Council. This can cause problems in the lead up to elections when polling stations can become unavailable for various reasons (e.g. flooding/vandalism – as was the case this year at Cardinal House) and an alternative is needed. This would necessitate an extraordinary meeting of Council to approve any change. In 2007 I suggested that Council give a delegated power to the Returning Officer to change polling places in emergency situations. This was agreed and I propose this continues.
12 Financial Implications
There are no financial implications to the authority in connection with the recommendations contained within this report
Name and contact details of author: -
Name: Martin John Job title: Principal Electoral Services Officer Service Area: Law and Governance Tel: 01865 252518 e-mail: [email protected]
List of background papers: None
94
OXFORD CITY COUNCIL
APPENDIX A REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT 1983
Parliamentary Polling Districts and Polling Places
Oxford East Constituency (Whole)
Oxford West and Abingdon Constituency (Part) 95
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Oxford City Council, in exercise of its powers in accordance with Section 18 of the Representation of the People Act 1983, and following a review carried out in accordance with Section 18C of the Act, has divided the Oxford East Constituency which falls wholly within its district into polling districts and designated polling places and also for the part of Oxford West and Abingdon constituency that falls within its district.
Particulars of the polling districts and designated polling places are set out in the attached schedule.
The arrangement will come into effect on 1st December 2011.
Polling Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comme nts District(s) stations
Wolvercote AA Baptist Church , Godstow Road 1 859 Elmthorpe Road, Godstow Road, Home Close, Meadow Accessible Prospect, Mill Road, Rosamund Road, Rowland Close, Webbs Close
AB Wolvercote Young People’s 2 1467 Banbury Road, Bladon Close, Blandford Avenue, Blenheim Accessible Club, St Peter’s Road Drive, Church Lane, Churchill Place, Cyprus Terrace, Davenant Road, Dovehouse Close, Field House Drive, First Turn, Godstow Road, Goose Green Close, Mere Road, Millway Close, Osborne Close, Pixey Place, Plough Close, Rawson Close, Sheriffs Drive, St Peter’s Road, Sunderland Avenue, Ulfgar Road, Wolvercote Green, Woodstock Close, Woodstock Road, Wyndham Way
AC Five Mile Drive Recreation 1 712 Banbury Road, Carey Close, Five Mile Drive, Foxton Close, Accessible (with ramp Ground (temporary unit) Jordan Hill, Kirk Close, Lakeside, Linkside Avenue, Linkside, provided) Rotha Field Road, Sunderland Avenue, Woodstock Road
AD Cutteslowe Park Pavilion, 1 782 Banbury Road, Bourne Close, David Walter Close, Elsfield Accessible
96 Way, Harbord Road, Harefields, Haslemere Gardens, Hayward Road, Holt Weer Close, Kendall Crescent, Lovelace Road, Marriott Close, Millers Acre, Park Close, Pennywell Drive, Priors Forge, Riddell Place, Sparsey Place, Talbot Road, Templar Road
Summertown BA The Oxford Centre, 333 2 1897 Apsley Road, Banbury Road, Beech Croft Road, Bishop Kirk Accessible Banbury Road Place, Capel Close, Grove Street, Hobson Road, Hyde Place, Middle Way, Oakthorpe Road, Osberton Road, Oxford Canal, Paddox Close, Richards Lane, Ridgemont Close, Rogers Street, South Parade, Squitchey Lane, Stratfield Road, Summerhill Road, The Paddox, Thorncliffe Road, Upland Park Road, Woodstock Road
BB Cutteslowe Community Centre, 1 1589 Aldrich Road, Banbury Road, Bodley Place, Buckler Road, Accessible Wren Road Carlton Road, Cavendish Road, Grimbly Place, Harpes Road, Hawksmoor Road, Islip Road, Jackson Road, Salisbury Crescent, Scott Road, Southdale Road, Water Eaton Road, Wentworth Road, Wolsey Road, Wren Road, Wyatt Road
Polling Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comments District(s) stations
BC Summertown URC Church Hall, 1 1028 Banbury Road, Hamilton Road, Hawkswell Gardens, Hernes Accessible Banbury Road Close, Hernes Crescent, Hernes Road, Kings Cross Road, Lonsdale Road, Lucerne Road, Mayfield Road, Portland Road, Summerfields, Victoria Road St. Margaret’s CA St Margaret’s Centre, Polstead 2 2517 Bainton Road, Banbury Road, Brindley Close, Burgess Mead, Accessible Road Canterbury Road, Chalfont Road, Clear Water Place, Complin`s Close, Cox`s Ground, Elizabeth Jennings Way, Frenchay Road, Hayfield Road, Kingston Road, Lark Hill, Lathbury Road, Moreton Road, Navigation Way, Polstead Road, Rackham Place, Rawlinson Road, Ryder Close, St Margaret`s Road, Staverton Road, Stone Meadow, Woodstock Road
CB St Andrew’s Church Centre, 1 1422 Banbury Road, Bardwell Road, Belbroughton Road, Accessible Linton Road Entrance Chadlington Road, Charlbury Road, Cunliffe Close, Ewert Place, Ferry Pool Road, Garford Road, Linton Road, Marston Ferry Road, Northmoor Place, Northmoor Road, Staverton Road, Woodstock Road 97 North DA Oxford Centre for Mission 2 2827 Acer Walk, Aristotle Lane, Balliol Court, Banbury Road, Benson Accessible Studies, Woodstock Road Place, Bradmore Road, Butler Close, Canterbury Road, Church (formerly the SS Philip and Walk, Crick Road, Farndon Road, Fyfield Road, Kingston Road, James Church Hall) Leckford Place, Leckford Road, Longworth Road, Merrivale Square, Merton Court, Norham Gardens, Norham Mews, Norham Road, North Parade Avenue, Park Town, Plantation Road, Plater Drive, Rutherway, Southmoor Road, St Bernard`s Road, Tackley Place, Walton Street, Walton Well Road, Warnborough Road, William Lucy Way, Winchester Road, Woodstock Road
DB St Giles’ Parish Room, 1 1322 Adelaide Street, Banbury Road, Bevington Road, Norham Accessible Woodstock Road Gardens, Observatory Street, St Anne`s College, Walton Street, Woodstock Road
Polling District(s) Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comments stations
Jericho and Osney EA, EB Jericho St Barnabas Centre, 1 2160 Albert Street, Allam Street, Canal Street, Cardigan Street, Accessible. Canal Street Combe Road, Cranham Street, Cranham Terrace, Great Clarendon St, Great Mead, Hart Street, Hythe Bridge Arm Moorings, Hythe Bridge Street, Jericho Street, Juxon Street, King Street, Mount Place, Mount Street, Nelson Street, Rewley Abbey Court, Rewley Road, Richmond Road, Rickyard Close, School Court, St Barnabas Street, Stable Close, Upper Fisher Row, Venables Close, Victor Street, Walton Crescent, Walton Lane, Walton Street, Wellington Street, William Lucy Way, Worcester Place, Worcester Street
EC West Oxford Community 2 2516 Abbey Road, Alexandra Road, Arthur Street, Barrett Street, Accessible Centre, Botley Road Binsey, Binsey Lane, Botley Road, Bridge Street, Bullstake Close, Cripley Road, Doyley Road, Duke Street, Earl Street, East Street, Ferry Hinksey Road, Gibbs Crescent, Harley Road,
98 Helen Road, Henry Road, Hill View Road, Lamarsh Road, Mill Street, Millbank, North Street, Oatlands Road, Osney Lane, Prestwich Place, Riverside Road, Roger Dudman Way, Russell Street, South Street, Swan Street, Venneit Close, West Street
Carfax FA Deaf & Hard of Hearing 1 829 Albion Place, Brewer Street, Butterwyke Place, Cambridge Accessible Centre, St. Ebbe’s Street Terrace, Clark`s Row, Faulkner Street, Littlegate Street, Luther Street, Norfolk Street, Oxford Castle, Paradise Square, Paradise See also polling district Street, Pembroke Street, Pennyfarthing Place, Pike Terrace, HC Queen Street, Roger Bacon Lane, Rose Place, Speedwell Street, St Aldate`s Street, St Ebbe`s Street, Tidmarsh Lane, Turn Again Lane
FB Wesley Memorial Hall, New 1 3373 Beaumont Buildings, Beaumont Lane, Beaumont Street, Becket Accessible Inn Hall Street Street, Blackhall Road, Broad Street, Bulwarks Lane, Cornmarket Street, Frewin Court, Friars Entry, George Street, George Street Mews, Gloucester Green, Gloucester Street, Hamel Walk, High Street, Hollybush Row, Little Clarendon Street, Lower Fisher Row, Magdalen Street, Market Street, Museum Road, New Inn Hall Street, New Road, (cont...)
Polling District(s) Polling Place No. of Electorate Str eets Comments stations
FB (cont…) (cont...) Osney Lane Oxpens Road, Park End Street, Parks Accessible Road, Pusey Lane, Pusey Street, Radcliffe Square, Rowland Hill Court, Ship Street, Shoe Lane, St Giles`s Street, St John Street, St Michael`s Street, St Thomas`s Street, The Hamel, Turl Street, Walton Street, Wellington Place, Wellington Square, Woodbine Place
Holywell GA Magdalen Auditorium, 2 2964 Bath Place, Catte Street, High Street, Holywell Street, Jowett Accessible Longwall Street Walk, Longwall Street, Manor Place, Manor Road, Mansfield Road, New College Lane, Parks Road, Queen`s Lane, Savile Road, South Parks Road, St Cross Road
GB St Columba’s United 1 1320 Alfred Street, Bear Lane, Blue Boar Street, High Street, King Accessible Reformed, Church Edward Street, Kybald Street, Logic Lane, Magpie Lane, Merton Street, Oriel Square, Rose Lane, St Aldate`s Street, Folly Bridge, GC now merged with GB St Aldate`s Street
99 Hinksey Park HA St Matthew’s Parish Centre, 2 1799 Abingdon Road, Brook Street, Buckingham Street, Chilswell Accessible Marlborough Road Road, Cobden Crescent, Edith Road, Hodges Court, Jubilee Terrace, Kineton Road, Long Ford Close, Marlborough Road, Newton Road, Salter Close, Western Road, White House Road
HB South Oxford Baptist Church, 1 2003 Abingdon Road, Bertie Place, Canning Crescent, Chatham Accessible Wytham Street Road, Egrove Close, Fox Crescent, Gordon Street, Gordon Woodward Way, Green Place, Iffley Lock, Isis Close, Lake Street, Leander Way, Lincoln Road, Monmouth Road, Norreys Avenue, Northampton Road, Oswestry Road, Peel Place, School Place, Stewart Street, Summerfield, Sunningwell Road, Varsity Place, Vicarage Lane, Vicarage Road, Weirs Lane, Wytham Street
HC Deaf & Hard of Hearing 1 476 Blackfriars Road, Dale Close, Folly Bridge, Friars Wharf, Accessible Centre, St. Ebbe’s Street Preachers Lane, Sadler Walk, Shirelake Close, Thames Street, See also polling district Trinity Street FA
Polling Polling Place No. of Ele ctorate Streets Comments District(s) stations
St. Clement’s JA St Clement’s Family Centre, 2 2534 Alan Bullock Close, Alma Place, Bath Street, Boulter Street, Accessible Cross Street Caroline Street, Cave Street, Chapel Street, Cherwell Street, Cowley Road, Cross Street, Dawson Street, Dudley Gardens, Glebe Street, Jeune Street, Little Brewery Street, London Place, Marston Road, Morrell Avenue, Parsons Place, Penson`s Gardens, Princes Street, Rectory Road, St Clement`s Street, Stone Street, Tawney Street, The Plain, Tyndale Road, Union Street, Wilson Place, York Place
JB East Oxford Games Hall, 1 2491 Ablett Close, Bartlemas Road, Cosin Close, Cowley Road, Accessible Collins Street Divinity Road, East Avenue, Hill Top Road, Manzil Way, Minster Road, Nye Bevan Close, Southfield Road, Warneford Road, St. Mary’s KA James Street Church 2 3439 Alhambra Lane, Aston Street, Bannister Close, Bramwell Place, Accessible Bullingdon Road, Circus Street, Cowley Place, Cowley Road, Crown Street, Denmark Street, Galpin Close, Green Street, KC now merged with KA Hawkins Street, Henley Street, Hurst Street, Iffley Road, James Street, Leon Close, Leopold Street, Marston Street, Moberly 100 Close, Randolph Street, Regent Street, St Mary`s Road, Stockmore Street, Temple Street
KB The Gladiator Club, 263 Iffley 1 904 Aston Street, Cowley Road, Hurst Street, Iffley Road, Magdalen Accessible Road Road, St Mary`s Road, Stanley Road
Iffley Fields LA Donnington Community Centre, 1 882 Addison Crescent, Arnold Road, Cornwallis Road, Donnington Accessible Townsend Square Bridge Road, Freelands Road, Iffley Road, Meadow Lane, Nixon Road, Radcliffe Road, Swinburne Road, Townsend Sq.
LB Ss Mary & John C of E Primary 1 1199 Argyle Street, Bedford Street, Chester Street, Daubeny Road, Accessible School, Isis Hall, Meadow Lane Eyot Place, Fairacres, Fairacres Road, Iffley Road, Meadow Lane, Parker Street, Stratford Street, Warwick Street
LC St Alban’s Hall, Charles Street 2 1962 Barnet Street, Boundary Brook Road, Catherine Street, Charles Accessible Street, Cricket Road, Drove Acre Road, Essex Street, George Moore Close, Golden Road, Harold Hicks Place, Hertford Street, Howard St, Iffley Rd, Leys Pl, Percy St, Pipkin Way, Quartermaine Cl, Ridgefield Rd, Sidney St, Silver Rd, Whitson Pl
Po lling Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comments District(s) stations
Rose Hill and Iffley MA, MD Iffley Church Hall, Church Way 1 855 Abberbury Avenue, Abberbury Road, Anne Greenwood Close, Accessible Aubrey Court, Bay Tree Close, Bears Hedge, Cavell Road, Church Way, Cordrey Green, Eastchurch, Fitzherbert Close, Iffley Road, Iffley Turn, Iffley Turn, Meadow Lane, Mill Lane, Sheepway Court, Stone Quarry Lane, Tree Lane, Wootten Drive MB Rose Hill Methodist Church, 1 1145 Annesley Road, Church Hill Road, Court Place Gardens, Accessible Rose Hill Courtland Road, Egerton Road, Ellesmere Road, Henley Avenue, Hunsdon Road, Iffley Turn, Rose Hill, Villiers Lane, Westbury Crescent, Wykeham Crescen MC Rose Hill Community Centre, 2 1987 Ashhurst Way, Asquith Road, Clinton Close, Cottesmore Road, Accessible The Oval Court Farm Road, Danvers Road, Dashwood Road, Desborough Crescent, Devereux Place, Fiennes Road, Jersey Road, ME now merged with MC Lambourn Road, Lenthall Road, Mortimer Road, Newlin Close, Nowell Road, Oxford Road, Pattison Place, Radford Close, Rivermead Road, Rowney Place, Spencer Crescent, St Martin`s Road, Thames View Road, The Oval, Williamson Way, Wynbush 101 Road Littlemore NA, NC Cardinal House, Newman 1 1729 Addison Drive, Bodley Road, Cardinal Close, Compass Close, Accessible Road Cowley Road, Eastern Ave, Fairlie Road, Fairlie Road, Goodey Close, Herschel Crescent, Hillsborough Close, Hillsborough Road, Kelburne Road, Littlemore Road, Long Lane, Mayfair Road, Newman Rd, Orchard Way, Oxford Road, Pulker Close, Rahere Rd, Rahere Road, Sheldon Way, Van Diemans Lane, NB1 Littlemore Village Hall, Railway 1 922 Brocklesby Road, Chapel Lane, David Nicholls Close, Dudgeon Accessible Lane Drive, Gwyneth Road, Kempson Crescent, Lanham Way Mandelbrote Drive Marlborough Close, Medhurst Way, Morrell Crescent, Oxford Road, Railway Lane, Sandford Road, Swinbourne Road, Thomson Terrace
NB2 Littlemore Community Centre 1 1415 Alice Smith Square, Bampton Close, Blewitt Court, Broadfields, Accessible Carpenter Close, Champion Way, College Lane, Cowley Road, Elm Tree Close, Faber Close, Giles Close, Giles Road, Grange Road, Hardings Close, Lakefield Road, Longwall, Minchery Farm Cottages, Minchery Farm Lane, Minchery Road, Newman Road, Northfield Close, Pipley Furlong, Priory Road, Redmoor Close, Sandy Lane West, Spring Lane, St Mary`s Close, St Nicholas Road, Upton Close, Vicarage Close,
Polling Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comments District(s) stations
Northfield Brook OA Blackbird Leys Community 1 1512 Birchfield Close, Blackbird Leys Road, Brambling Way, Costar Accessible Centre, Blackbird Leys Road Close, Falcon Close, Kestrel Crescent, Knights Road, Linnet Close, Little Field, Mallard Close, Merlin Road, Monks Close, Nunnery Close, Overmead Green, Pegasus Road, Peregrine Road, Skylark Place, Spindleberry Close, Whitethorn Way, Willow Way, Windale Avenue
OB The Barn, Nightingale Avenue 1 2527 Acacia Avenue, Anemone Close, Appletree Close, Aspen Accessible Square, Avens Way, Bergamot Place, Blacksmith`s Meadow, Bluebell Court, Brake Hill, Brooklime Walk, Buttercup Square, Campion Close, Celandine Place, Chaffinch Walk, Cherry Close, Choswell Spring, Cleaver Square, Coltsfoot Square, Columbine Gardens, Coriander Way, Cotton Grass Close, Cranesbill Way, Deer Walk, Dunnock Way, Elder Way, Emperor Gardens, Farm Close, Fieldfare Road, Firs Meadow, Forget-Me-Not Way, Foxglove Close, Fry`s Hill, Grebe Close, Greenfinch Cl, Hawlings Row, Helleborine Cl, Hobby Court, Hyacinth Walk, Jack Argent Close, Jane Seaman Court, Kingfisher Green, Long Ground, 102 Marigold Close, Mistletoe Green, Mole Place, Moorhen Walk, Nettlebed Mead, Nightingale Avenue, Norman Smith Rd, Nuthatch Cl, Oxeye Court, Partridge Walk, Peartree Close, Pipit Close, Plover Drive, Pochard Place, Potter`s Court, Pottery Piece, Primrose Place, Robin Place, Rowan Grove, Sage Walk, Saxifrage Square, Shepherd`s Hill, Sparrow Way, Spinney Field, Spruce Gardens, Swallow Close, Swift Close, Tarragon Drive, Teal Cl, Tern Walk, Thistledown Cl, Verbena Way, Violet Way, Warbler Walk, Wayfaring Cl, Woodpecker Green, Yarrow Close Blackbird Leys PA Sacred Heart Church Hall, 1 1732 Allin Close, Ashmole Place, Balfour Road, Blackbird Leys Road, Accessible Sawpit Road Blay Close, Cuddesdon Way, Druce Way, Furlong Close, Garsington Road, Haldane Road, Jourdain Road, Kent Close, Ladenham Road, Longlands Road, Moorbank, Poulton Place, Sandy Lane, Sawpit Road, Tucker Road, Warburg Crescent, Watlington Road, Wesley Close, Wingate Close PB Pegasus Primary School, Field 2 2147 Andromeda Close, Angelica Close, Berry Close, Briar Way, Accessible Avenue Brook View, Bryony Close, Bulrush Road, Butterwort Place, Centaury Place, Clematis Place, Clover Place, Comfrey Road, Crowberry Rd, Cuddesdon Wy, Erica Cl, Field Ave, (cont…)
Polling Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comments District(s) stations
PB (cont…) Pegasus Primary School, Field (cont…) Flaxfield Road, Gentian Road, Green Hill, Harebell Avenue Road, Honeysuckle Grove, Hornbeam Drive, Jasmine Close, Juniper Drive, Little Bury, Lobelia Road, Marjoram Close, Mercury Road, Overbrook Gardens, Pegasus Road, Pennycress Road, Periwinkle Place, Pimpernel Close, Pine Close, Prunus Close, Rampion Close, Redwood Close, Reedmace Close, Rest Harrow, Samphire Road, Sorrel Road, Starwort Path, Strawberry Path, Sundew Close, Thistle Drive, Three Corners Road, Timothy Way, Trefoil Place, Vetch Place, Watlington Road, Woodruff Close, Yew Close Cowley QA Florence Park Community 1 1861 Campbell Road, Church Cowley Road, Church Cowley Road, Accessible Centre, Cornwallis Road Cleveland Drive, Clive Road, Cornwallis Close, Cornwallis Road, Eleanor Close, Florence Park Road, Gerard Place, Havelock Road, Henley Avenue, Kames Close, Lawrence Road, Littlehay Road, Lytton Road, Maidcroft Road, Outram Road, Rymers Lane, St Omer Road, Trevor Place
QB103 St James Church Centre, 2 2164 Amory Close, Bailey Road, Barns Road, Bartholomew Road, Accessible Beauchamp Lane Beauchamp Lane, Beauchamp Place, Between Towns Road, Boswell Road, Burgan Close, Cholsey Close, Coleridge Close, Crowell Road, Dodgson Road, Eleanor Close, Frederick Road, Gaisford Road, Garsington Road, Hampden Road, Hockmore Street, Kersington Crescent, Knolles Road, Liddell Road, Lockheart Crescent, Napier Road, Oxford Road, Phipps Road, Pound Way, St Luke`s Road, The Grates, Upper Barr Cowley Marsh RA Regal Area Community Centre, 2 2322 Barracks Lane, Bartlemas Close, Belvedere Road, Bhandari Accessible Ridgefield Road Close, Catwell Close, Cowley Road, Cricket Road, Cumberland Road, Don Stuart Place, Gillians Way, Glanville Road, Herbert Close, Kenilworth Ave, Milton Road, Morris Crescent, Reliance Way, Ridgefield Road, Saunders Road, Shelley Road, Westfield Close, Weymann Terrace
RB City of Oxford Silver Band Hall, 2 2310 Badger’s Walk, Barracks Lane, Bennett Crescent, Crescent Accessible Temple Road Close, Crescent Road, Don Bosco Close, Edmund Road, Hendred Street, Hollow Way, Junction Road, Kirby Place, Leafield Road, Marsh Road, Owens Way, Oxford Road, Purland Close, Salegate Lane, Silkdale Close, St Christopher Place, Temple Road, Turner Close
Polling Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comments District(s) stations
Lye Valley SA St Francis Primary School, 2 2356 Bleache Place, Brasenose Driftway, Burbush Road, Burton Accessible Horspath Road Place, Corunna Crescent, Cranmer Road, Craufurd Road, Fairfax Road, Fanshawe Place, Fern Hill Road, Fletcher Road, Hollow Way, Horspath Road, Ivy Close, Marshall Road, Normandy Crescent, Oliver Road, Paget Road, Ridley Road, Rupert Road, Sunnyside, White Road, Wilkins Road, Yeats Close
SB St Francis’ Church Centre, 2 2336 Acre Close, Awgar Stone Road, Benouville Close, Benson Accessible Hollow Way Road, Brasenose Driftway, Bulan Road, Cinnaminta Road, Coverley Road, Cranmer Road, Dene Road, East Field Close, Eastern Bypass, Fair View, Glebelands, Hollow Way, Hundred Acres Close, Hunter Close, Inott Furze, James Wolfe Road, Kennedy Close, Lambton Close, Lye Valley, Meyseys Close, Nether Durford Close, Old Barn Ground, Peat Moors, Shorte Close, The Slade, Town Furze, Troy Close Churchill TA, TD Wood Farm Community Centre, 2 2008 Abbots Wood, Atkyns Road, Blackstock Close, Bonar Road, Accessible 104 Titup Hall Drive Bracegirdle Road, Broad Oak, Calcot Close, Chillingworth Crescent, Godfrey Close, Holland Place, Horspath Driftway, Temporarily at Atkyns Joan Lawrence Place, Leiden Road, Long Close, Mascall Court, Atkyns Road while Avenue, Masons Road, Nuffield Road, Old Road, Palmer Road, the Community Centre is Pauling Road, Peppercorn Avenue, Pether Road, Pickett rebuilt. Avenue, Rede Close, Slade Close, Stansfeld Place, Stubbs Avenue, The Slade, Three Fields Road, Titup Hall Drive, Wood Farm Road
TB The Launderette, Girdlestone 1 679 Atwell Place, Churchill Drive, Churchill Hospital, Coolidge Accessible Road Shops Close, Dynham Place, Everard Close, Flexney Place, Girdlestone Close, Girdlestone Road, Goslyn Close, Heath Close, Massey Close, Old Road, Shelford Place, Warren Crescent, Wylie Close
TC Cheney Community Hall, 2 1789 Acland Close, Cardwell Crescent, Cheney Hall, Cheney Lane, Accessible Cheney School Cheney Lane, Demesne Furze, Finch Close, Gipsy Lane, Grays Road, Harcourt Terrace, Headington Hill, Headington Road, Highfield Avenue, Mileway Gardens, Old Road, Roosevelt Drive, Skene Close, Stonor Place, Valentia Road, Warneford Lane
Polling Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comments District(s) stations
Quarry & Risinghurst UA, UE The Coach House, Quarry Road 1 781 Binswood Avenue, Cummings Close, Dorchester Close, Accessible Douglas Downes Close, Larkfields, Margaret Road, Mark Road, Old Road, Old Road, Quarry Road, Quarry Road, Stansfield Close, Upper Meadow, Weyland Rd, York Avenue, York Road, UB Headington Community Centre, 1 1760 Bankside, Beaumont Road, Burrows Close, Bushnell Close, Accessible Gladstone Road Chequers Place, Colemans Hill, Cooper Place, Coppock Close, Gladstone Road, Green Road, Hedges Close, Holley Crescent, Holyoake Road, John Snow Place, London Road, Margaret Road, New Cross Road, Pitts Road, Quarry High Street, Quarry Hollow, Quarry School Place, Ramsay Road, Scrutton Close, Spooner Close, St Leonard`s Road, Stile Road, Tilehouse Close, Toot Hill Butts, Trafford Road, Trinity Road, Wharton Road, William Kimber Crescent
UC, UD Risinghurst Community Centre, 1 1695 Baker Close, Carter Close, Collinwood Close, Collinwood Road, Accessible Kiln Lane Collinwood Road, Downside End, Downside End, Downside 105 Road, Downside Road, Forest Road, Green Road, Green Road, Grovelands Road, Harold White Close, Kiln Lane, Lewis Close, London Road, Netherwoods Road, Pond Close, Ridgeway Road, Ringwood Road, Sermon Close, Shelley Close, Slaymaker Close, Spring Lane, Stanway Road, Stanway Road, The Larches, The Link, The Roundway, Wychwood Lane Barton and Sandhills VA Viking Sports Club, Table Tennis 1 924 Ash Grove, Barton Lane, Barton Road, Blackthorn Close, Accessible Room Chestnut Avenue, Gurden Place, Hawthorn Avenue, London Road, Lyndworth Close, Lyndworth Mews, North Way, Northfield Road, Sefton Road, Stowood Close, The Beeches VB, VC Barton Neighbourhood Centre, 1 2070 Aldebarton Drive, Alden Crescent, Atkinson Close, Barton Accessible Underhill Circus Village Road, Bassett Road, Bayswater Road, Bernwood Road, Brampton Road, Brome Place, Burchester Avenue, Bushey Leys Cl, Cress Hill Place, Edgecombe Road, Fettiplace Road, Gurl Close, Handlo Place, Harolde Close, Hengrove Close, Henry Taunt Close, High Cross Way, Hubble Close, Ilsley Road, Mather Road, Northway, North Way, Overdale Close, Pound Field Close, Shaftesbury Road, Sherwood Place, Stowford Road, Sturges Close, Taggs Gate, Underhill Circus, Wick Close, Wilcote Road
Polling Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comments District(s) stations
Barton and Sandhills (cont…) VD Bayards Hill School, Waynflete 1 1018 Bayswater Farm Rd, Bayswater Rd, Claymond Road, Colwell Accessible Road Entrance Drive, Cranley Rd, Green Ridges, Humfrey Rd, London Road, Lydia Close, Malford Road, Routh Road, Waynflete Road
VE Sandhills Primary School, Terret 1 677 Burdell Avenue, Burlington Crescent, Bursill Close, Delbush Accessible Avenue Avenue, Elton Close, Hill View, Hosker Close, London Road, Merewood Avenue, Roberts Close, Sweet Green Close, Terrett Avenue Headington WA The Scout Hall, Perrin Street 2 2017 All Saints Road, Barrington Close, Bateman Street, Bickerton Accessible Road, Brookside, Cecil Sharp Place, Gardiner Street, Gathorne Road, Kennett Road, Langley Close, Latimer Road, Lime Walk, London Road, Margaret Road, Mattock Close, New High Street, Norton Close, Nursery Close, Old Road, Perrin Street, Piper Street, Rock Edge, St Anne`s Road, Stapleton Road, Wilberforce Street, Windmill Road, Windsor Street, York Road
106 WB The Baptist Church Hall, New 1 741 Dunstan Road, Ethelred Court, Horwood Close, Larkins Lane, Accessible High Street Laurel Farm Close, London Road, North Place, Old High Street, Osler Road, St Andrew`s Lane, St Andrew`s Road, Stephen Road, Stoke Place, The Croft, William Orchard Close
WC St Anthony of Padua RC Church, 1 1077 Beech Road, Fortnam Close, Franklin Road, Headley Way, Ivy Accessible 115 Headley Way Lane, London Road, Sandfield Road, Staunton Road, Woodlands Close, Woodlands Road Headington Hill & Northway XA Northway Community Centre, 1 1100 Alesworth Grove, Borrowmead Road, Broadhead Place, Dora Accessible Dora Carr Close Carr Close, Foxwell Drive, Gorse Leas, Gouldland Gardens, Grunsell Close, Halliday Hill, Ingle Close, John Buchan Road, Maltfield Road, Meaden Hill, Milne Place, Saxon Way, Stainfield Road, Steep Rise, Stockleys Road, Sutton Road, Upway Road, Westlands Drive XB New Marston Primary School, 1 1214 Ambleside Drive, Ashlong Road, Bowness Avenue, Brookfield Accessible Copse Lane Crescent, Cherwell Drive, Colterne Close, Coniston Avenue, Copse Lane, Derwent Avenue, Eden Drive, Headley Way, Marsh Lane, Snowdon Mede
Polling Polling Place No. of Electorate Streets Comments District(s) stations
XC New Marston Pastoral Centre, 1 2251 Crotch Crescent, Doris Field Close, Feilden Grove, Hadow Accessible Jack Straws Lane Road, Harberton Mead, Headington Hill, Headington Road, Holmes Park, Jack Straw`s Lane, John Garne Way, Lynn Close, Marston Road, Pullens Field, Pullens Lane, Rolfe Place
Marston YA Mortimer Hall, Oxford Road 2 2427 Arlington Drive, Ashlong Road, Barns Hay, Beechey Avenue, Accessible Boults Close, Boults Lane, Broughtons Close, Cannons Field, Cavendish Drive, Cherwell Drive, Church Lane, Clays Close, Cotswold Crescent, Cromwell Close, Cumberlege Close, Dents Close, Elms Drive, Elsfield Road, Ewin Close, Fairfax Avenue, Fane Road, Gordon Close, Harlow Way, Haynes Road, Horseman Close, Jessops Close, Lewell Avenue, Little Acreage, Lodge Close, Marsh Lane, Mill Lane, Mortimer Drive, Nicholas Avenue, Oxford Road, Park Way, Ponds Lane, Raymund Road, Rimmer Close, Rippington Drive, Rylands, Salford Road, Southcroft, St Nicholas Park, The Butts, Wards Mobile Home Park, Windsor Crescent 107 YB Marston United Reformed 1 542 Croft Close, Croft Road, Farmer Place, Heather Place, Marston Accessible Church, (Room Adjoining) Road, Old Marston Road, Ouseley Close, Stainer Place, Taverner Place
YC St Michael’s CE Primary School, 1 1306 Edgeway Road, Ferry Road, Goodson Walk, Harberton Mead, Accessible Marston Road Hayes Close, Hugh Allen Crescent, John Garne Way, Marston Road, Moody Road, Nicholson Road, Parry Close, Peacock Road, Prichard Road, Purcell Road, Weldon Road, Westrup Close, William Street,
NOTES
th Polling districts GC and KC are no longer required since the coming into force of the new parliamentary boundaries on 5 May 2010.
Polling district ME is no longer required as the Rose Hill estate is no longer part of Littlemore Parish Council.
Other, smaller, polling districts (UE and TD) are required as they are part of Risinghurst and Sandhills parish council.
This page is intentionally left blank
108 Agenda Item 21
To: Full Council
Date: 10 October 2011
Report of: Head of Law and Governance / Monitoring Officer
Title of Report: REVIEW OF FULL COUNCIL PROCEDURES AND OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Summary and Recommendations
Purpose of report : To review the operational and constitutional procedures applicable to Council meetings to allow for more efficient public engagement and to propose other constitutional amendments.
Report Approved by: Jeremy Thomas
Policy Framework: Not applicable
It is recommended to Council that –
(a) The changes to Council procedures described in this report are agreed by Council
(b) The Constitution be amended to reflect the changes proposed to the Council Procedure Rules, the Council scheme of delegation and the Contract Procedure Rules as set out in the body of this report, with effect from the 11 th October 2011.
(c) Every Council meeting is filmed and published on the internet.
Council Procedure Rules
1. Full Council is programmed to meet six times each year (one Annual Meeting and five ordinary meetings of which one is described as for the Budget but is not reserved exclusively for the Budget) and is open to the public. The public may address Members at Council and ask questions. Over the past two years the amount of public involvement has increased significantly and the present deadlines in the Council Procedure Rules are unhelpful in terms of ensuring that the public can follow the meeting and debate as effectively as Members. The changes proposed in this
109
report are promoted in order to align deadlines so that members of the public can more easily participate in and follow Council meetings.
2. Detailed below are the numbers of questions, motions etc. that have been submitted for Council from May 2006 to April 2011
Council Addresses Public Member Motions Questions Questions
2006/07 9 Nil 190 52
2007/08 17 Nil 178 29
2008/09 17 2 99 38
2009/10 18 45 66 37
2010/11 32 37 102 58
93 84 635 214
Members’ Questions on Notice
3. There are two deadlines in play in relation to questions on notice from members. The advance (but informal) deadline is approximately 4 working days before the formal deadline in the constitution which is 9.30 am on the working day before the Council meeting.
4. This practice has grown in use in order to facilitate written replies in advance of the Council meeting. Whilst that aspect is commendable, the means by which such questions and answers are published is in the form of a Briefing Note, circulated electronically, one working day before the meeting.
5. It is proposed that the deadline for questions on notice be brought forward in order that both the question and an answer can be published in the formal agenda. This will ensure that members of the public can view the questions and answers when the agenda is published, rather than having to resort to reading the Briefing Note during the meeting.
6. In order to accommodate the preparation of written answers it is proposed that the deadline for questions on notice from Members should be changed to 1 pm, 10 working days before the Council meeting.
7. This change will effectively allow 4 working days for the preparation of written answers and 1 working day for the compilation, printing and distribution of the agenda. 110
Motions on Notice
8. In order to facilitate more efficient Member participation it is also proposed that the deadline for motions on notice be extended from 8 working days so that it too becomes 1 pm, 10 working days before the Council meeting.
Addresses and questions by the public
9. At present the deadlines for addresses and questions by the public is 1 pm, 2 working days before the meeting. This means that the wording of addresses and questions are only reproduced in the Briefing Note.
10. It is proposed that the deadline for both addresses and questions by the public should be changed to 1 pm, 10 working days before the Council meeting.
11. This deadline would be consistent with the deadline for motions and questions by Members and more importantly would enable the text of the address and question and written replies to be reproduced in the formal agenda.
12. Clarification is needed on whether the person who has asked/submitted a question, actually asks the question at the meeting itself (reading their question aloud). Paragraph 11.9(d) states “The Lord Mayor will ask the questioner to ask their question….”. The addresses/public questions part of Council has a 45 minute time slot overall.
13. It is proposed, notwithstanding that the question has been printed with the agenda, that the person does read out their question if present at the meeting and if they wish to do so. The procedure would continue as present with the Board Member verbally responding or through a written response reproduced with the agenda. There would continue to be no right of reply by the member of the public.
14. Council Procedure Rule 11.9(b) presently provides that “each question must include the name and address of the person or organisation asking it” Questions are submitted by organisations or groups under this rule to be asked in the name of individuals. We received one complaint from an individual who had no knowledge of the matter but who had been named as the questioner by an organisation.
15. Therefore, it is proposed that the reference to the ‘organisation’ is removed and that each individual is required to submit their own question along with their name and address. There would be no substitutes allowed to ask a question if the questioner was not present.
111
Public Addresses
16. At present written details of an address to full Council must be provided by 1pm two working days before the meeting. It is proposed that the rule be changed so that the complete text of the address must be supplied to the Head of Law and Governance either via the current [email protected] e-mail address, by hand or post, by the date and time in paragraph 10.
17. For the last two Council meetings we have undertaken a pilot using the St. Aldate’s Room where a live feed of the meeting is shown. This is a useful ‘overflow’ facility for the public gallery and enables members of the public to be called in to the Council Chamber to make their address without any delay and without the member of the public missing any of the meeting. It also enables the Chamber to be reserved for Members, Officers and the Press only and it is proposed to continue that practice.
Public Awareness
18. The recording of Council as a ‘live feed’ to the internet is now established. I am aware that there is cross party support for that recording and publishing but I am mindful of the fact that Council has not explicitly resolved to do so (thereby denying any Member the opportunity to oppose such an arrangement). Council is recommended to resolve that all Council meetings in future are the subject of a live feed to the internet.
19. In addition a leaflet will be published about Full Council and how the public can be involved, along the same lines as the “Click for Democracy” leaflet used for other agenda. This will be available on the website and more widely distributed for example at libraries, community centres and other Council offices, and would link to a form that the public would need to complete if they wished to ask a question or make an address.
Council scheme of delegation
20. In order to take account of changes to the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 concerning powers to immediately suspend the licences of hackney carriage and private hire drivers in the interests of public safety, paragraph 5.6 of the Constitution requires amendment to read:
5.6 Taxi and private hire and other vehicle licensing
(a) Description of responsibility All the taxi and private hire and other vehicle licensing responsibilities in Paragraph B of Schedule 1 to the Local Authorities (Functions and Responsibilities) (England) Regulations 2000
(b) Who carries out the responsibility? Full council sets policies on taxi and private hire and other vehicle licensing. The general purposes licensing committee: 112
• recommends and reviews policies on taxi and private hire and other vehicle licensing • sets and reviews licence fees The general purposes licensing committee appoints a hackney carriage and private hire licensing sub-committee: • to deal with cases concerning applicants for or holders of taxi, private hire or other drivers or vehicle licences brought to the sub-committee by officers • to decide taxi and private hire and other vehicle, driver and operator licence applications when the applicant has a conviction and the relevant service head has concerns about the nature of the offence, or the applicant or the vehicle may not be suitable for some other reason • to withdraw and suspend licences for taxis and private hire and other vehicles and their drivers and operators. The head of environmental development does everything else (ADD) including the immediate suspension of taxi and private hire drivers licences in the interests of public safety.
Also, in order to take account of the Council’s Street Trading Policy, set by Council on 19 th April 2010, paragraph 5.7 of the Constitution requires amendment to read
5.7 Other licensing and registration
(a) Description of responsibility All the responsibilities in Paragraph B of Schedule 1 to the Local Authorities (Functions and Responsibilities) (England) Regulations 2000 except taxi and private hire and other vehicle licensing
(b) Who carries out the responsibility? Full council sets policies on licensing and registration. The general purposes licensing committee : • recommends and reviews policies on licensing and registration • sets and reviews licence fees • agrees a charity collection scheme • agrees and varies a street trading policy and scheme. The general purposes licensing committee appoints a licensing and registration sub-committee to : • decide sex establishment licence applications when there are objections (OMIT) • decide street trading applications that are for longer than three months • decide applications to renew street trading permission when there has been a (ADD) relevant complaint about the trader or the trader has broken the conditions of their street trading permission in the past year or where there is competition for a vacant approved site. The head of environmental development does everything else.
Contract Rules
21. The following wording is recommended for insertion between the first and second paragraphs of Paragraph 19.3 in the Contract Procedure Rules
“The Council is seeking to ensure that all purchases made by it are undertaken through a single electronic tendering system as selected by the Head of Business Improvement (“the Selected System”). The Head of Business Improvement will provide details of the Selected System and any change to it. All purchases of goods or services with a value in excess of £1000.00 must, therefore, be undertaken through the Selected 113
System. All such purchases shall also comply with the thresholds for quote and tender provisions as set out in paragraph 19.11, and all other relevant provisions of these Contract rules. An exemption from using the Selected System can only be obtained with the consent of the Head of Business Improvement.”
Name and contact details of author: -
Name: Jeremy Thomas Job title: Head of Law and Governance Service Area / Department: Law and Governance Tel: 01865 252224 e-mail: [email protected]
Background papers: None
114