MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL OF THE BOROUGH OF HELD AT THE CIVIC CENTRE, HARROGATE ON WEDNESDAY, 4 MARCH 2020 (FROM TIME NOT SPECIFIED – TIME NOT SPECIFIED)

PRESENT: Councillor Stuart Martin, MBE in the Chair. Councillor Zoe Metcalfe, Councillor Chris Aldred, Councillor Margaret Atkinson, Councillor Bernard Bateman, MBE, Councillor Philip Broadbank, Councillor Nick Brown, Councillor Rebecca Burnett, Councillor Mike Chambers, MBE, Councillor Trevor Chapman, Councillor Jim Clark, Councillor Richard Cooper, Councillor Ed Darling, Councillor John Ennis, Councillor Sam Gibbs, Councillor Michael Harrison, Councillor Paul Haslam, Councillor Sid Hawke, Councillor Phil Ireland, Councillor Steven Jackson, Councillor Sue Lumby, Councillor Stanley Lumley, Councillor John Mann, Councillor Pat Marsh, Councillor Pauline McHardy, Councillor Samantha Mearns, Councillor Nigel Middlemass, Councillor Ann Myatt, Councillor Tim Myatt, Councillor Victoria Oldham, Councillor Andrew Paraskos, Councillor Alex Raubitschek, Councillor Matt Scott, Councillor Nigel Simms, Councillor Graham Swift, Councillor Norman Waller, Councillor Tom Watson, Councillor Matthew Webber, Councillor Christine Willoughby and Councillor Robert Windass.

Late Arrivals: XXX

Early Departures: XXX

74 – APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE: There were no apologies for absence.

75 – URGENT BUSINESS: There was no urgent business.

76 – DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST: Members were advised back when the publication draft local plan was considered and were reminded now, that a Council’s interest in land (be it County, District or any Parish Council’s interest in land) was not a relevant consideration to any decision as to whether the land should be allocated in the local plan. Local authorities owned significant areas of land, and it was not unreasonable that some of that land or land in which an authority has an interest would be proposed for development. As a planning authority, it was essential that any choices Members made were based on the best interests of the planning of the area and that decisions should not be influenced by any possible gain to the Council nor its neighbouring authorities.

In so far as a declaration of interests, then whilst a financial benefit may accrue to the County Council if land at New Farm, was developed, that financial benefit did not attach to County Council Members personally. Indeed it was unlikely to impact on them significantly more than any other council tax payer in the county. County Councillors were paid an allowance and they were not in office at County Council for profit or gain. As such this interest was very unlikely to constitute a DPI. However, as a precaution against the decision taken in the Councillor Flowers case in East Devon and in order to give those dual hatted County Council Members who are also Harrogate Borough Council Members confidence in their ability to vote,

1 should they wish to do so, then they were invited to request a dispensation.

Those dual hatted Members present tonight participating in Minute 89/19 had requested and had been granted a dispensation under Section 33 of the which enabled them to remain in the meeting room, participate in the debate and vote on the item.

For transparency it was understood that the following land owned by Harrogate Borough Council was allocated in the proposed plan:  Dragon Road car park (site ref H63)  land at Pannal (PN18 – employment allocation)  Harlow nurseries (Site ref H65)

This was not considered to be a personal or a DPI because this matter did not relate to an external body. Members were aware that interests in land were not a relevant consideration.

Councillors Margaret Atkinson, Philip Broadbank, Mike Chambers, Jim Clark, Richard Cooper, John Ennis, Paul Haslam, Stan Lumley, John Mann, Stuart Martin, Zoe Metcalfe, Andy Paraskos and Robert Windass declared an interest in respect of Minute 89/19 on the basis that they were Members of North County Council. The Monitoring Officer had granted these Members a dispensation under Section 33 of the Localism Act 2011 which enabled them to remain in the meeting room, participate in the debate and vote on the item.

Councillor Michael Harrison also declared an interest in Minute 89/19 on the basis that he was an Executive Member of County Council and left the meeting room upon consideration of the item.

77 – EXEMPT INFORMATION: There was no exempt information.

78 – MINUTES: The Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 12 February 2020 were submitted.

Moved by Councillor Richard Cooper Seconded by Councillor Graham Swift and RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 12 February 2020 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

79 – COMMUNICATIONS: 01. Order of Business: The Mayor advised that in view of the large public presence for this item, he had, in accordance with Standing Order 8(2)(i) agreed to vary the order of business and take Cabinet Minute 106/19 of 3 March, dealing with the Adoption of the Harrogate District Local Plan immediately after agenda item 8. As would also become evident, Council would also receive a number of questions associated with the Local Plan item.

2

02. Filming of Council Meeting: The Mayor advised that Tim Cook from the Harrogate Informer intended to record the meeting. The recording took place from within the Chamber and would focus on the Members, officers and anyone speaking at the meeting. Any member of the public who did not wish to be filmed could make it known.

03. The Army Foundation College: The Mayor advised that the Army Foundation College would be exercising its right to march through Harrogate town and there will be a Freedom Parade involving approximately 200 soldiers on the morning of Friday 8 May. Further details of the event will be circulated to Members in due course.

80 – PUBLIC ARRANGEMENTS - PETITIONS: No petitions had been received.

81 – PUBLIC ARRANGEMENTS - QUESTIONS: The Mayor advised that he had received notification of six public questions under Standing Order 27 and he invited the questioners to step forward and ask their questions in the order in which they were received.

1. Question to the Cabinet Member for Planning from Marilyn Peckett

I am a concerned resident living in and downhill from the proposed new settlement in the Local Plan. All the flood plain fields are presently under water and the beck is overflowing.

I would like to ask if Harrogate BC Planning Policy and Flood Risk Assessments take account of climate change when assessing a planning application for development. If so what are the attenuation measures and are these considered adequate for the extreme weather patterns we are now experiencing?

Response:

Thank you for your question. Flood risk has been considered as part of the sustainability appraisal that underpins the selection of the broad location. It shows that while there are some areas at risk of flooding, the vast majority of the broad location is at little or no risk of flooding.

In accordance with national guidance, a sequential approach to flood risk will be followed when identifying the specific site boundary. This will be based on the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) that includes specific advice on the predicted impacts of climate change. As with all applications for development, the detailed proposals for the new settlement would need to show that the potential for surface water flooding can be managed through a drainage scheme that stores surface water on-site and attenuates its release at a rate no greater than the undeveloped green field rate (or less where possible). The drainage scheme would need to show that there is sufficient storage on-site to accommodate the 1 in 100 year rainfall event plus an additional 30% to account for climate change and a further 10% to account for urban creep.

3

2. Question to the Cabinet Member for Planning from Kevin Bramley, Hunsingore, Great Ribston with Walshford and Cattal Parish Council

Climate change and its impact on flooding is of concern to Cattal residents.

The roads leading South and West out of the village flood frequently through the year. They have been flooded and the road blocked three out of the last four weekends. Ponding is occurring more frequently on the carriageway North and West of Hunsingore leading to Walshford caused by surface water run off. Sodden ground and surface water run off from higher ground has become a major factor in dwellings being flooded in recent time in other parts of the Country.Our residents want to be protected from that.

Given the size and magnitude of the new settlement proposal and its broad location on generally higher ground concern is expressed that surface water run off will carry a detrimental impact on Cattal and Kirk Hammerton and the productivity of agricultural land in the area of the new settlement.

Will the Council withdraw the proposal from the Local Plan given it is not essential to hit the required housing need?

Response:

Thank you for your question. Local plan policy DM4 acknowledges that the New Settlement DPD will need to include measures to mitigate flood risk, including the use of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS). As with all applications for development, the detailed proposals for the new settlement would need to show that the potential for surface water flooding can be managed through a drainage scheme that stores surface water on-site and attenuates its release at a rate no greater than the undeveloped green field rate (or less where possible). This means that the surface water run-off rate would not be increased by development taking place and may actually lead to a reduced rate following development.

The Local Plan has gone through a very detailed process of preparation, analysis, consultation and finally examination by an Inspector who has found it to be sound. The New Settlement is an integral part of the Plan’s strategy to meet the district’s longer term housing need without which the Plan would fail the test of soundness i.e. justified, effective and consistent with national policy.

3. Question to the Cabinet Member for Planning from James Herbert

Thank you for your question. The housing numbers confirmed in the Inspector’s Report on the Examination of the Harrogate District Local Plan show that the Plan’s proposed housing supply is a “very generous over allocation of 25% against the Plan’s housing requirement” [para 180]. If you remove the new settlement’s contribution of new dwellings in the plan period, there is still an excess allocation of 16% which exceeds the National Planning Policy Framework guidance of a buffer of 10% – 15%. Policy NE8, protection of agricultural land, states that the best and most versatile agricultural land (grades 1,2 and 3a) will be protected from development not associated with agriculture or forestry except where it can be demonstrated to be

4 necessary. Why are you committing to the irrevocable destruction of agricultural land in contravention of Policy NE8 and to the serious adverse impact on conservation villages that will be the result of a new settlement in the broad location of the Hammertons and Cattal (policy DM4) when the numbers demonstrate that it is not necessary because, even without the new settlement, the Plan’s housing requirements will be still met in the plan period?

Response:

Thank you for your question. This issue has been fully examined throughout the Local Plan examination process and the Inspector has concluded that the Council’s strategy for delivering homes is positively prepared, justified and consistent with national policy. He specifically concludes that a new settlement is an appropriate response to meeting the borough’s longer term housing needs.

4. Question to the Cabinet Member for Planning from Alison Goodwin

This council has a commitment to sustainable development and there has recently been a dramatic societal shift that now places care for the environment ahead of other considerations. The Court of Appeal has ruled that the Heathrow expansion plans (and probably, therefore, many other infrastructure and road projects as well) are unlawful because they do not take proper account of how it affects Britain’s climate commitments and the government is not going to challenge that judgement. Given this context, can you justify proceeding with the plan to include a new settlement in the broad location of the Hammertons and Cattal (DM4) which is to be built in open countryside and will destroy high grade agricultural land, in contravention of policy NE8, protection of agricultural land, and wildlife habitats and will be car-dependent and therefore will produce higher emissions for every journey to the centres of population in the Borough than alternatives closer to the urban centres or than if it was not built?

Response:

Thank you for your question. The Broad Location for growth is part of a wider strategy that focuses growth in sustainable locations, including along key public transport corridors. As outlined in Policy DM4, the New Settlement will include extensive networks of green and blue infrastructure and aim to mitigate and adapt to climate change as required by other policies within the Plan.

5. Question to the Cabinet Member for Planning from Councillor Karan Main, Kirk Hammerton Parish Council

In the consultation on the new settlement, 86% of respondents objected to a new settlement in the broad location of Hammerton and Cattal. There has been no recognition of the strength of feeling and views of local people who are most affected by the new settlement and who feel this is being “done to them” rather than “done with them”. The Inspector’s Report on the Examination of the Harrogate District Local Plan states at its paragraph 27 that the production of a New Settlement

5

Development Plan for policy DM4 will “need to address very carefully the implications of the new settlement for nearby villages, having regard to the degree to which the new settlement is just that, rather than being merely an extension of an extant settlement.” If the Plan is adopted, the Keep the Hammertons Green Action Groups wish to be involved from the earliest stages as formal stakeholders in a deep and meaningful way in the creation of the NSDPD relating to DM4. That will include, inter alia, consideration of its placement and boundaries within the broad location, the master planning and design elements and the supply of infrastructure. What reassurance will the Council give and what measures will it take to ensure meaningful involvement in the creation of the NSDPD for those most affected by the new settlement?

Response:

Thank you for your question. Work on the New Settlement DPD has been paused pending the outcome of the Local Plan examination. KTHG and the relevant Parish Councils were involved in preliminary Stakeholder involvement held in 2018. Following the anticipated adoption of the Local Plan, the Council will be prioritising production of the New Settlement DPD and one of the first steps in this will be to develop a programme of community and stakeholder involvement.

6. Question to the Cabinet Member for Planning from Alan Smith

Parts of OC12 in the broad location for growth for a new settlement are subject to covenants which mean that North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) will benefit by perhaps as much as £40 million of pounds if that land is sold for development. 12 HBC elected members, including the leader of the council, are also elected members of NYCC and may have a personal political interest in generating funds for NYCC. This most important fact has never been discussed publicly or referred to in any of the planning documents which demonstrates a lack of transparency and openness. The Local Government Association publication, Probity in Planning, makes clear that elected members should behave in accordance with the seven principles of public life. The fifth principle is:

Openness: holders of public office should act and take decisions in an open and transparent manner. Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear and lawful reasons for so doing.

Furthermore, the same document’s section 4, Registration and disclosure of interests, states that:

If a councillor has a non-pecuniary personal interest, including being a member of an outside body, they should disclose that interest, but then may still speak and vote on that particular item. However, the Local Government Ethical Standards Report (2019) highlights the potential for conflicts and potential need to withdraw from committee in relation to non-pecuniary interests as well.

What measures have the Council taken to avoid the public perception that there is a lack transparency, a potential conflict of interest and an apparent bias towards the OC12 site?

6

Response:

 I cannot comment on whether NYCC will benefit by as much as £40m. I am not privy to that information [this is my understanding but obviously needs confirming as Rebecca needs to feel comfortable that what she is saying is accurate]  I do however understand that NYCC has a financial interest in land at New Farm, Green Hammerton  If the plan is adopted as recommended then there is the possibility that New Farm may fall with the location for the new settlement which will be determined through the process of adopting a New Settlement DPD. There is also the chance that New Farm will not fall within the location and in those circumstance NYCC will not see any financial benefit.  Either way, I like all members have been advised during the development of the local plan that NYCC’s interest in land is not a relevant consideration to any decision as to whether the land should be allocated in the local plan. All members have also been advised that as a planning authority, it is essential that any choices we as members make are based on the best interests of the planning of the area and that decisions should not be influenced by any possible gain to the Council nor its neighbouring authorities.

In terms of the measures put in place then:

1. HBC’s monitoring office provided written advice in 2017 prior to the Council’s approval of the publication draft local plan. That advice was to all HBC councillors who were also NYCC Councillors. It specifically stated that:  the County Council’s interest in the land must not be a relevant consideration to any decision as to whether the land should be allocated in the local plan. Similarly the advice was that Harrogate Borough Council’s interest in any land must not be a relevant consideration.  whilst the Monitoring Officer considered the risk of receipt of an NYCC allowance to constitute a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest to be very unlikely, because the issue of NYCC’s interest had been brought to the MOs and member’s attention by the promoter of an alternative site then the MO appreciated that some members may be concerned about participating in the vote and as such she offered the opportunity for members to remove that risk by granting all dual hatted members a dispensation under section 33 Localism Act 2011  the Council's Code requires members to consider whether "participation or voting on a matter may be seen as conflicting with the General Principles" of Public Life. If so, members were reminded that they were required to declare the interest, cease to participate or vote and leave the meeting as if it were a DPI.

2. Dual hatted members have registered their interest on the publicly available register

3. Dual Hatted members all declared their interest as a NYCC member at the Council meeting on 13 December 2017 when the publication draft local plan

7

came forward

4. All dual hatted members who participated in the debate and voted had requested and been granted a dispensation by the MO. This process was explained at the meeting on 13 December 2017 and is recorded in the publicly available minutes

82 – ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE EXECUTIVE AND COMMITTEE CHAIRS: The Mayor advised that in accordance with Standing Order 12(9) two written questions had been received and which would, in accordance with the Standing Order, be dealt with as the first questions under this item. He would then invite verbal questions of the Executive Members and Committee Chairs from other Members of the Council.

1. Question to the Cabinet Member for Planning from Councillor Matthew Webber

There are 2 banners advertising commercial activities attached to the railings of Harrogate Hospital on its boundary with the Stray at the Empress roundabout.

This was reported to HBC customer services on 19th December 2019 and a response was received from a Planning Enforcement Officer on 17th February saying that “it was not expedient to take enforcement action.” After being asked to explain this the officer said, “The banner sign is quite small, is set against a backdrop and is not visually prominent. It does not pose a highway safety risk, and is not harmful. We have to be realistic about which cases we pursue. In this case I don’t consider it an efficient use of Council resources to pursue action, given the limited benefits of removal, and the levels of harm.

Response:

Thank you for the question. I am happy to review this. The Investigating Officer has been on site again and will be advising that an application is required. If no application is made further discussions will take place to determine what further action is appropriate.

2. Question to the Cabinet Member for Resources, Enterprise and Economic Development from Councillor Chris Aldred

In the 2019/20 Financial Year, this Administration increased the fees payable for a Garden Licence (Small Plots) by an average of over 700%. When the Cabinet Member attended Overview & Scrutiny back in September, he claimed that “Almost all of the tenants have simply agreed to the new rates”. I believe there are 26 Tenants effected by these increases. Could the Cabinet Member inform me , as of today, how many tenants have renewed their Licence, & are paying the new fees ?

Response:

HBC estates manage over 450 properties with an asset value of £136 million. So I was rather surprised that our garden license amendments impacting peppercorn

8 rents made in 2018 received so much scrutiny from the new Chair of Overview and Scrutiny. Members will be aware that I presented further updates to this project to O&S last year.

In 2018, it was noticed that our modest garden license programme generated just £1,200 in revenue but absorbed disproportionate officer time to police, administer, follow up, chase, negotiate etc. Residents were paying different prices on different dates and the process was bureaucratic and expensive to administer. The report simplified and standardised the garden licenses to ensure that our residents received a standardised rental agreement and paid fair, equalised pricing for equal land. The goal was to make our rents transparent, equalised and fair for all residents and to make some progress in recovering costs of officer time spent managing the programme. As expected, residents reacted according to their own circumstances. Some paid the new fee, a small group closed their rental agreement, returning the land to HBC and 3 have expressed interest in purchasing their parcels of land.

As of today, there are four residents who are yet to finalise the status contracts, but three of these are very small and are expected to pay only the minimum standard fee of £150pa. It is fair to say that, in the context of our £1.3M rent roll, this was considered to be a low priority and officers have not closed these three contracts but intend to do so. Of the 26 original contracts there is a fourth outstanding agreement which, I have been advised, has been concluded but contracts have not yet been signed.

Consistent with my remarks that almost all of the licence arrangements had been drawn to a conclusion, I can therefore confirm that 88.4% of the parcels are agreed negotiations, and are to be completed subject to the signing of paperwork. It is worthwhile noting that the income has increased to around £7,000 but still continues to fail to cover the full cost of managing these licenses primarily because officer time is continually absorbed by persistent enquiries from one particular tenant who advertises their unhappiness, requests multiple FOI and demands additional help and support despite actually freely signing an agreement with HBC. It may be that in time, these rates will need to increase if we and the tax payer are burdened further with unwarranted cost.

Cabinet Members then responded verbally to questions from Members of the Council. In response to a question from Councillor Philip Broadbank on the final account for the Civic Centre following the news that Harry Fairclough had gone into administration, the Cabinet Member for Resources, Enterprise and Economic Development advised that the matter was now in the hands of the administrators.

Councillor Ed Darling requested an update on progress made in relation to the provision of banking in . The Cabinet Member for Resources, Enterprise and Economic Development reported that the possibility of setting up a shared banking facility was being investigated with Newcastle Building Society. Banks were being encouraged to bring mobile branches to Knaresborough, particularly on market day. The Cabinet Member also supported undertaking constructive dialogue with Halifax Bank, which had stayed longest in Knaresborough town centre.

9

Councillor Pat Marsh referred to the Notice of Motion passed by Council on 7 March 2018 in relation to the removal of single use plastics and requested an update on progress with achieving the aims of the motion. The Cabinet Member for Sustainable Transport agreed to circulate an update to all Members.

Councillor Matthew Webber requested a briefing following the Council’s transfer from the Leeds to the North Yorkshire LEP, and the Leader agreed that this would be provided.

83 – MEMORANDA OF THE REPORT FROM THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMISSION: There were no reports.

84 – FINANCIAL UPDATE: The Head of Finance presented a financial update, the main focus of which was to provide an update on the financial position for this year, provide an overview of the recent budget process and highlight future issues.

The main focus of this update is to provide: - An update on the financial position for this year. - An overview of the recent budget process. - Any updates and highlight future issues.

2019/20 - Forecast overspend of £58k at February Cabinet. - Overall very close to budget, however some significant variations. - Compares to £1k forecast overspend at Qtr3 last year.

2020/21 - Council Tax resolution to be approved tonight: - Increases of NYCC 3.99%, Fire 1.99% and Police £10 at Band D (3.91%) - Along with HBC’s increase of £5 at Band D (2.08%), the average is a 3.66% increase. - Key HBC Statistics since 2010: - £8.0m (67%) reduction in General Government Grant. - £8.0m reduction in the net budget.

Medium Term Outlook - £1,055k of savings and income identified in 2021/22 indicative budget. - Annual gaps of £300k each year after smoothing by Budget Transition Fund. - MTFS refresh to be undertaken for summer 2020. - Flexibility and long term planning is key. - Great uncertainty in respect of government funding from 2021/22 onwards. - Capital & Investment Programme: funding shortfall in medium term.

Government Consultations/Thinking - Multi-year Spending Review in 2020. - Fair Funding Review. - 75% Business Rate Retention. - Implementation of above expected for 2021/22, through Local Government Finance Settlement in December 2020.

10

85 – REPORT BACK ON PREVIOUS NOTICES OF MOTION:

86 – RECORDING OF QUESTIONS AT COUNCIL AND LIVE-STREAMING OF COUNCIL MEETINGS: The Mayor advised that, in accordance with Standing Order 10(6)(a), there was one report to be considered at the meeting. The response of the General Purposes Committee in respect of the Notice of Motion referred to it by the December meeting of the Council would be dealt with under General Purposes minute 33/19 and would be addressed by Council under Minute 86/19(04) below.

87 – MINUTES OF COMMITTEES AND CABINET: The Council resolved upon the various non-delegated Minutes of the Committees and Cabinet as follows:

88 – CABINET - 8 JANUARY 2020: Cabinet Minutes 84/19 and 85/19 were dealt with by the Council at its meeting held on 12 February 2020 and were included for information purposes only.

89 – CABINET - 5 FEBRUARY 2020: Moved by Councillor Richard Cooper Seconded by Councillor Graham Swift and RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 5 February 2020 be approved and adopted.

(Minutes 92/19 and 95/19 were dealt with by the Council at its meeting held on 12 February 2020.)

90 – AUDIT AND GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE - 9 JANUARY 2020: 52/19 - TREASURY MANAGEMENT ANNUAL STRATEGY, ANNUAL INVESTMENT STRATEGY, PRUDENTIAL AND TREASURY INDICATORS, ANNUAL MINIMUM REVENUE PROVISION STATEMENT:

This matter was also considered by the Cabinet at its meeting held on 5 February 2020. The Cabinet Minute was the substantive recommendation and was dealt with under Minute 86/19(02) above.

91 – GENERAL PURPOSES COMMITTEE - 23 JANUARY 2020: The Mayor invited the Chair of General Purposes Committee, Councillor Samantha Mearns, to move General Purposes Committee Minute 33/19 and to speak to the response of the Committee on the notice of motion in the names of Councillors Chris Aldred and Trevor Chapman regarding minuting of all verbal questions and answers raised at Council and also ‘live streaming’ of Council meetings.

In moving the Minute the Chair reported on the deliberations of the Committee and advised that where Members wished a question and response to be recorded they could submit it in writing in advance of the meeting, or request that it be recorded. The Committee recommended that current practice be continued. In respect of live-

11 streaming the Committee had received indicative quotes for the provision of live streaming, however the lack of interest from the public did not seem to warrant such expenditure. The Committee had recommended that meetings of Council not be live-streamed. There had been a further recommendation that the Chair of Planning Committee consult informally with the Planning Committee on the feasibility of trialling live streaming at meetings of the Planning Committee. The Chair of General Purposes Committee reported that this consultation had now taken place and the Planning Committee had not supported a trial of live streaming and this would be formally reported back to the General Purposes Committee.

Councillor Aldred noted his disappointment that meetings would not be live streamed and suggested that cheaper alternatives could be investigated.

Moved by Councillor Samantha Mearns Seconded by Councillor Matt Scott and RESOLVED:

That General Purposes Committee Minute 33/16 be approved and adopted.

92 – NOTICES OF MOTION RECEIVED: The Mayor advised that there were three Notices of Motion before the Council. The first in the names of Councillors Pat Marsh and Christine Willoughby would be debated by the Council, in accordance with Standing Order 10(6)(f). The remaining motion in the names of Councillors Philip Broadbank and Pat Marsh would, once moved and seconded, stand referred for consideration by the Cabinet and the motion in the names of Councillors Matthew Webber and Chris Aldred would, once moved and seconded, stand referred for consideration by the General Purposes Committee.

The Mayor advised that an amendment to the first notice of motion had been proposed by the mover and seconder of the motion and Councillor Marsh moved her motion as amended.

(1) “That the Council prioritise within the next 6 months the production of a Supplementary Planning Document on Sustainable Design to add further guidance to the requirements of Policy CC4: This would include a set of Development Control Advice Notes that explain the criteria and technical standards that the Council will consider when dealing with developments in trying to achieve Zero Carbon on those developments and if not achievable how Carbon Offsetting could be implemented.

Moved by Councillor Pat Marsh Seconded by Councillor Christine Willoughby

In accordance with Standing Order 10(6)(f) the Mayor invited debate on the motion. On there being no debate the Mayor invited the Leader to move his amendment.

As an amendment it was

Moved by Councillor Rebecca Burnett Seconded by Councillor Richard Cooper

12

“That the Council prioritise a selective plan review to Policy CC4: Sustainable Design to consider achieving net zero carbon development. In the Interim, the Council will within the next 6 months prioritise the production of a Supplementary Planning Document on Sustainable Design to add further guidance to the requirements of Policy CC4. : This would include a set of Development Control Advice Notes that explain the criteria and technical standards that the Council will consider when dealing with developments in trying to achieve Zero Carbon on those developments and if not achievable how Carbon Offsetting could be implemented. “

On a vote being taken the amendment was carried and became the substantive motion.

As an amendment it was

Moved by Councillor Pat Marsh Seconded by Councillor Christine Willoughby

“That the Council prioritise a selective plan review to Policy CC4: Sustainable Design to consider achieving net zero carbon development. In the Interim, the Council will prioritise this year the production of a Supplementary Planning Document on Sustainable Design to add further guidance to the requirements of Policy CC4 to achieve net zero carbon developments in the Local Plan.”

As an amendment to the amendment Councillor Richard Cooper proposed that the words “this year” be removed, and this was accepted by the mover and seconder.

On a vote being taken the amendment was carried and became the substantive motion, as below:

“That the Council prioritise a selective plan review to Policy CC4: Sustainable Design to consider achieving net zero carbon development. In the Interim, the Council will prioritise the production of a Supplementary Planning Document on Sustainable Design to add further guidance to the requirements of Policy CC4 to achieve net zero carbon developments in the Local Plan.”

Upon a vote being taken on the amended Notice of Motion, the Mayor declared the motion unanimously carried.

(2) “That this Council creates a 'Town Centres' Investment Budget £180k, which would replace the District Improvement Fund, replacing a bidding pot with a more Strategic approach working with BIDS and local Communities such as Parish Councils to improve the heart of their Communities. Alongside this the Council would review the Harrogate Town Centre Master Plan, 6 years old, and help create Master Plans for other retail areas within the District.”

Moved by Councillor Philip Broadbank Seconded by Councillor Pat Marsh

In accordance with Standing Order 10(6)(a) the motion stood referred to the Cabinet.

13

(3) “That motions properly submitted for the consideration of Harrogate Borough Council shall only be subject to amendment with the agreement of the mover and seconder. Without that agreement the motion shall proceed in accordance with standing orders and be debated and voted on as submitted.”

Moved by Councillor Matthew Webber Seconded by Councillor Pat Marsh

In accordance with Standing Order 10(6)(a) the motion stood referred to the General Purposes Committee.

93 – COUNCIL TAX RESOLUTION 2020/21: Before calling upon the Leader to move the Council Tax resolution for 2020/21 the Mayor reminded Members that, in accordance with the regulations issued in 2014 and, as a consequence, the Council’s own Standing Orders, it would be necessary for a recorded vote to be taken on the Council Tax resolution for 2020/21.

Moved by Councillor Richard Cooper Seconded by Councillor Graham Swift and RESOLVED:

That (1) COUNCIL TAX BASE: it be noted that on 18 December 2019 the Head of Finance calculated the following amounts for the year 2020/21 in accordance with regulations made under Section 31B(3) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:

(a) Whole of the Council’s Area 63,427.74 being the amount calculated, in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) () Regulations 2012, as its Council Tax Base for the year;

(b) Parts of the Council’s Area the amounts mentioned in Column 1 of Schedule A to this Resolution, being the amounts calculated, in accordance with Regulation 6 of the Regulations, as the amounts of its Council Tax Base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items may relate.

(2) DISTRICT/PARISH COUNCIL TAX RATES: the following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2020/21 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:

(a) District/Parish Gross Expenditure £117,078,732 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(2)(a) to (f) of the Act;

(b) Income £100,349,519 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(3)(a) to (d) of the Act;

14

(c) District/Parish Net Expenditure £16,729,213 being the amount by which the aggregate at 2(a) above exceeds the aggregate at 2(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31A(4) of the Act, as its council tax requirement for the year;

(d) Basic Amount of tax (including average parish precepts) £263.75231 being the amount at 2(c) above divided by the amount at 1(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31B(1) of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for the year;

(e) Parish Precepts £1,131,063 being the aggregate amount of all special items referred to in Section 34(1) of the Act;

(f) Basic Amount of Tax (Unparished Areas) £245.92 being the amount at 2(d) above less the result given by dividing the amount at 2(e) above by the amount at 1(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates;

(g) Basic Amount of Tax (Parished Areas) the amounts mentioned in Column 2 of Schedule A to this Resolution, being the amounts given by adding to the amount at 2(f) above the amounts of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council’s area mentioned divided in each case by the amount at 1(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(3) of the Act, as the basic amounts of its Council Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate;

(h) District/Parish Council Tax Rates the amounts mentioned in Columns 3 A to H of Schedule A to this Resolution, being the amounts given by multiplying the amounts at 2(f) and 2(g) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5(1) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36(1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands.

(3) COUNTY COUNCIL, POLICE, FIRE & CRIME COMMISSIONER – POLICE AND FIRE & RESCUE AUTHORITY TAX RATES: it be noted that for the year 2020/21 the North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC), the Police, Fire & Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire and the North Yorkshire Police, Fire & Crime Commissioner, Fire & Rescue Authority (NYFRA) have stated the following amounts in precepts issued to the Council, in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, for each of the categories of dwellings shown below:

15

Valuation Bands

A B C D E F G H £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ North Yorkshire County Council* 908.98 1,060.47 1,211.97 1,363.47 1,666.47 1,969.46 2,272.45 2,726.94 North Yorkshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner – Police Precept 177.18 206.71 236.24 265.77 324.83 383.89 442.95 531.54 North Yorkshire Police, Fire & Crime Commissioner - Fire & Rescue Authority Precept 48.46 56.54 64.61 72.69 88.84 105.00 121.15 145.38

* The NYCC figures above include the Adult Social Care precept (see table overleaf for breakdown)

A B C D E F G H £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Adult Social 79.91 93.22 106.54 119.86 146.50 173.13 199.77 239.72 Care Other 829.07 967.25 1,105.43 1,243.61 1,519.97 1,796.33 2,072.68 2,487.22 Total 908.98 1,060.47 1,211.97 1,363.47 1,666.47 1,969.46 2,272.45 2,726.94

(4) TOTAL COUNCIL TAX RATES: having calculated the aggregate in each case of the amounts at 2(h) and 3 above, the Council, in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the amounts mentioned in Schedule B to this Resolution as the amounts of Council Tax for the year 2020/21 for each of the categories of dwellings shown therein.

(5) BUSINESS RATES: it be noted that on 30 January 2020 the Head of Finance approved the 2020/21 National Non-Domestic Rates Return (NNDR1), which projected total non-domestic rating income for 2020/21 for the district at £62,562,037. £31,281,019 will be paid to Central Government as the Central Share, £5,630,583 will be paid to NYCC as their proportion of the Local Share and £625,620 will be paid to NYFRA as their proportion of the Local Share. £25,024,815

16

will be retained by the Council as its proportion of the Local Share before payment of the tariff of £21,843,870 and net payment to the North and West Yorkshire Business Rates Pool of £1,127,790 resulting in net retained business rate income of £2,053,155.

FOR: Councillors Margaret Atkinson, Bernard Bateman, Philip Broadbank, Nick Brown, Rebecca Burnett, Mike Chambers, Trevor Chapman, Jim Clark, Richard Cooper, Ed Darling, John Ennis, Sam Gibbs, Michael Harrison, Paul Haslam, Phil Ireland, Steven Jackson, Sue Lumby, Stanley Lumley, John Mann, Stuart Martin, Pat Marsh, Samantha Mearns, Zoe Metcalfe, Nigel Middlemass, Ann Myatt, Tim Myatt, Victoria Oldham, Andrew Paraskos, Alex Raubitschek, Matt Scott, Nigel Simms, Graham Swift, Tom Watson, Matthew Webber, Christine Willoughby and Robert Windass.

Total: 35 AGAINST: Councillors Sid Hawke and Pauline McHardy Total: 2 ABSTENTIONS: None Total: 0

The Mayor declared the Motion carried. Schedule A 2020/21 1 2 3 Basic Parts of the Council's Area Council Amount Valuation Bands Tax Base of Tax A B C D E F G H £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ with Hopperton 75.36 249.90 166.60 194.37 222.13 249.90 305.43 360.97 416.50 499.80 Arkendale, Coneythorpe & Clareton Grouped Parish Council 201.30 260.33 173.55 202.48 231.40 260.33 318.18 376.03 433.88 520.66 Asenby Parish Council 139.77 255.58 170.39 198.78 227.18 255.58 312.38 369.17 425.97 511.16 Azerley and Winksley Grouped Parish Council 267.67 270.20 180.13 210.16 240.18 270.20 330.24 390.29 450.33 540.40 Baldersby Parish Council 130.57 288.89 192.59 224.69 256.79 288.89 353.09 417.29 481.48 577.78 Bewerley Parish Council 350.25 265.91 177.27 206.82 236.36 265.91 325.00 384.09 443.18 531.82 Bilton-in- with Bickerton Parish Council 205.94 280.20 186.80 217.93 249.07 280.20 342.47 404.73 467.00 560.40 Birstwith Parish Council 412.20 271.39 180.93 211.08 241.24 271.39 331.70 392.01 452.32 542.78 Bishop Monkton Parish Council 414.68 266.76 177.84 207.48 237.12 266.76 326.04 385.32 444.60 533.52 Bishop Thornton and Warsill Grouped Parish Council 280.34 265.90 177.27 206.81 236.36 265.90 324.99 384.08 443.17 531.80 Boroughbridge Parish Council 1,447.86 285.29 190.19 221.89 253.59 285.29 348.69 412.09 475.48 570.58 Brearton Parish Meeting 80.59 245.92 163.95 191.27 218.60 245.92 300.57 355.22 409.87 491.84 Burton Leonard Parish Council 316.14 266.74 177.83 207.46 237.10 266.74 326.02 385.29 444.57 533.48 Cattal, Hunsingore and Walshford Grouped Parish Council 177.60 261.25 174.17 203.19 232.22 261.25 319.31 377.36 435.42 522.50 Clint-cum-Hamlets Parish Council 247.52 264.50 176.33 205.72 235.11 264.50 323.28 382.06 440.83 529.00 Cundall and Norton-le-Clay Grouped Parish Council 197.91 245.92 163.95 191.27 218.60 245.92 300.57 355.22 409.87 491.84 Dacre Parish Council 368.34 273.07 182.05 212.39 242.73 273.07 333.75 394.43 455.12 546.14 Darley and Menwith Parish Council 501.78 275.81 183.87 214.52 245.16 275.81 337.10 398.39 459.68 551.62 Dishforth Parish Council 293.49 274.92 183.28 213.83 244.37 274.92 336.01 397.11 458.20 549.84 Dunsforths Parish Meeting 122.80 264.40 176.27 205.64 235.02 264.40 323.16 381.91 440.67 528.80 Farnham Parish Meeting 100.85 262.78 175.19 204.38 233.58 262.78 321.18 379.57 437.97 525.56 Fearby, Healey and District Grouped Parish Council 187.95 261.35 174.23 203.27 232.31 261.35 319.43 377.51 435.58 522.70 Felliscliffe Parish Council 178.48 264.27 176.18 205.54 234.91 264.27 323.00 381.72 440.45 528.54 Ferrensby Parish Meeting 92.61 252.40 168.27 196.31 224.36 252.40 308.49 364.58 420.67 504.80

17

Follifoot and Plompton Grouped Parish Council 375.93 274.44 182.96 213.45 Fountains Abbey Grouped Parish Council 118.02 284.05 189.37 220.93 Goldsborough and Flaxby Grouped Parish Council 292.16 268.72 179.15 209.00 Grantley and Sawley Grouped Parish Council 242.82 280.68 187.12 218.31 Great Ouseburn Parish Council 271.53 280.49 186.99 218.16 Green Hammerton Parish Council 375.69 283.18 188.79 220.25 Grewelthorpe Parish Council 226.69 269.25 179.50 209.42 Hampsthwaite Parish Council 555.93 269.30 179.53 209.46 Hartwith-cum-Winsley Parish Council 450.76 272.99 181.99 212.33 Haverah Park and Beckwithshaw Grouped Parish Council 252.73 265.31 176.87 206.35 Hewick and Hutton Grouped Parish Council 203.58 255.10 170.07 198.41 High and Low Bishopside Parish Council 939.87 274.91 183.27 213.82 Kearby-with-Netherby Parish Council 105.97 260.07 173.38 202.28 Killinghall Parish Council 1,724.89 256.33 170.89 199.37 Kirby Hill and District Grouped Parish Council 413.36 258.02 172.01 200.68 Kirkby Malzeard, Laverton & Dallowgill Grouped Parish Council 496.98 276.61 184.41 215.14 Kirkby Overblow Parish Council 269.87 273.71 182.47 212.89 Kirk Deighton Parish Council 247.90 269.49 179.66 209.60 Kirk Hammerton Parish Council 232.08 275.00 183.33 213.89 Knaresborough Successor Parish Council 5,820.53 270.44 180.29 210.34 Langthorpe Parish Council 423.83 245.92 163.95 191.27 Little Ouseburn Grouped Parish Council 181.20 266.62 177.75 207.37 Little Ribston Parish Council 98.80 291.47 194.31 226.70 Littlethorpe Parish Council 225.66 262.76 175.17 204.37 Long Marston Parish Council 251.89 265.17 176.78 206.24 Lower Washburn Grouped Parish Council 408.73 264.88 176.59 206.02 Markenfield Hall Parish Meeting 4.92 245.92 163.95 191.27 Markington with Wallerthwaite Parish Council 282.60 261.79 174.53 203.61 Marton-cum-Grafton Parish Council 244.73 266.15 177.43 207.01 Marton-le-Moor Parish Council 91.22 264.86 176.57 206.00 Masham Grouped Parish Council 578.12 245.92 163.95 191.27 Melmerby and Middleton Grouped Parish Council 184.90 265.48 176.99 206.48 Mid-Wharfedale Grouped Parish Council 392.82 257.59 171.73 200.35 Moor Monkton Parish Council 142.61 275.72 183.81 214.45 Newall-with-Clifton Parish Council 65.82 253.52 169.01 197.18 Nidd Parish Council 59.88 270.97 180.65 210.75 Parish Council 37.06 272.90 181.93 212.26 North Rigton Parish Council 239.93 282.60 188.40 219.80 North Stainley-with-Sleningford Parish Council 295.48 290.59 193.73 226.01 Nun Monkton Parish Council 144.54 322.02 214.68 250.46 Pannal with Burn Bridge Parish Council 1,253.19 272.73 181.82 212.12 Rainton-with-Newby Parish Council 165.87 285.89 190.59 222.36 Ripley Parish Council 124.08 268.89 179.26 209.14 Successor Parish Council 5,563.84 317.81 211.87 247.19 Roecliffe and Westwick Grouped Parish Council 118.45 299.51 199.67 232.95 Scotton Parish Council 310.77 256.38 170.92 199.41 Scriven Parish Council 142.99 277.61 185.07 215.92 Sharow Parish Council 257.72 282.54 188.36 219.75 Sicklinghall Parish Council 182.96 265.05 176.70 206.15 Skelton Grouped Parish Council 148.04 279.84 186.56 217.65 South Stainley-with-Cayton Parish Meeting 76.73 245.92 163.95 191.27 Spofforth-with-Stockeld Parish Council 533.81 264.68 176.45 205.86

18

Staveley and Copgrove Grouped Parish Council 285.08 268.21 178.81 208.61 Thornthwaite-with-Padside Parish Meeting 99.15 252.48 168.32 196.37 Thornville Parish Meeting 8.79 245.92 163.95 191.27 Thruscross Parish Meeting 52.11 268.95 179.30 209.18 Tockwith and Wilstrop Grouped Parish Council 719.27 285.16 190.11 221.79 Upper Nidderdale Grouped Parish Council 243.71 278.75 185.83 216.81 Walkingham Hill with Occaney Parish Meeting 11.68 245.92 163.95 191.27 Washburn Grouped Parish Council 271.86 274.24 182.83 213.30 Wath and Norton Conyers Grouped Parish Council 113.18 278.52 185.68 216.63 Weeton Parish Council 485.11 255.81 170.54 198.96 Whixley Parish Council 366.83 268.90 179.27 209.14 Wighill Parish Council 95.61 258.47 172.31 201.03

All other parts of the Council's area X X 163.95 191.27

Schedule B 2020/21

Parts of the Council's Area Valuation Bands A B C D E F G H £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Allerton Mauleverer with Hopperton Parish Meeting 1,301.22 1,518.09 1,734.95 1,951.83 2,385.57 2,819.32 3,253.05 3,903.66 Arkendale and Coneythorpe and Clareton Grouped Parish Council 1,308.17 1,526.20 1,744.22 1,962.26 2,398.32 2,834.38 3,270.43 3,924.52 Asenby Parish Council 1,305.01 1,522.50 1,740.00 1,957.51 2,392.52 2,827.52 3,262.52 3,915.02 Azerley and Winksley Grouped Parish Council 1,314.75 1,533.88 1,753.00 1,972.13 2,410.38 2,848.64 3,286.88 3,944.26 Baldersby Parish Council 1,327.21 1,548.41 1,769.61 1,990.82 2,433.23 2,875.64 3,318.03 3,981.64 Bewerley Parish Council 1,311.89 1,530.54 1,749.18 1,967.84 2,405.14 2,842.44 3,279.73 3,935.68 Bilton-in-Ainsty with Bickerton Parish Council 1,321.42 1,541.65 1,761.89 1,982.13 2,422.61 2,863.08 3,303.55 3,964.26 Birstwith Parish Council 1,315.55 1,534.80 1,754.06 1,973.32 2,411.84 2,850.36 3,288.87 3,946.64 Bishop Monkton Parish Council 1,312.46 1,531.20 1,749.94 1,968.69 2,406.18 2,843.67 3,281.15 3,937.38 Bishop Thornton and Warsill Grouped Parish Council 1,311.89 1,530.53 1,749.18 1,967.83 2,405.13 2,842.43 3,279.72 3,935.66 Boroughbridge Parish Council 1,324.81 1,545.61 1,766.41 1,987.22 2,428.83 2,870.44 3,312.03 3,974.44 Brearton Parish Meeting 1,298.57 1,514.99 1,731.42 1,947.85 2,380.71 2,813.57 3,246.42 3,895.70 Burton Leonard Parish Council 1,312.45 1,531.18 1,749.92 1,968.67 2,406.16 2,843.64 3,281.12 3,937.34 Cattal, Hunsingore and Walshford Grouped Parish Council 1,308.79 1,526.91 1,745.04 1,963.18 2,399.45 2,835.71 3,271.97 3,926.36 Clint-cum-Hamlets Parish Council 1,310.95 1,529.44 1,747.93 1,966.43 2,403.42 2,840.41 3,277.38 3,932.86 Cundall and Norton-le-Clay Grouped Parish Council 1,298.57 1,514.99 1,731.42 1,947.85 2,380.71 2,813.57 3,246.42 3,895.70 Dacre Parish Council 1,316.67 1,536.11 1,755.55 1,975.00 2,413.89 2,852.78 3,291.67 3,950.00 Darley with Menwith Parish Council 1,318.49 1,538.24 1,757.98 1,977.74 2,417.24 2,856.74 3,296.23 3,955.48 Dishforth Parish Council 1,317.90 1,537.55 1,757.19 1,976.85 2,416.15 2,855.46 3,294.75 3,953.70 Dunsforths Parish Meeting 1,310.89 1,529.36 1,747.84 1,966.33 2,403.30 2,840.26 3,277.22 3,932.66 Farnham Parish Meeting 1,309.81 1,528.10 1,746.40 1,964.71 2,401.32 2,837.92 3,274.52 3,929.42 Fearby, Healey and District Grouped Parish Council 1,308.85 1,526.99 1,745.13 1,963.28 2,399.57 2,835.86 3,272.13 3,926.56 Felliscliffe Parish Council 1,310.80 1,529.26 1,747.73 1,966.20 2,403.14 2,840.07 3,277.00 3,932.40 Ferrensby Parish Meeting 1,302.89 1,520.03 1,737.18 1,954.33 2,388.63 2,822.93 3,257.22 3,908.66 Follifoot and Plompton Grouped Parish Council 1,317.58 1,537.17 1,756.77 1,976.37 2,415.57 2,854.76 3,293.95 3,952.74 Fountains Abbey Grouped Parish Council 1,323.99 1,544.65 1,765.31 1,985.98 2,427.31 2,868.64 3,309.97 3,971.96 Goldsborough and Flaxby Grouped Parish Council 1,313.77 1,532.72 1,751.68 1,970.65 2,408.58 2,846.50 3,284.42 3,941.30 Grantley and Sawley Grouped Parish Council 1,321.74 1,542.03 1,762.31 1,982.61 2,423.19 2,863.78 3,304.35 3,965.22 Great Ouseburn Parish Council 1,321.61 1,541.88 1,762.14 1,982.42 2,422.96 2,863.50 3,304.03 3,964.84 Green Hammerton Parish Council 1,323.41 1,543.97 1,764.54 1,985.11 2,426.25 2,867.39 3,308.52 3,970.22 Grewelthorpe Parish Council 1,314.12 1,533.14 1,752.15 1,971.18 2,409.22 2,847.27 3,285.30 3,942.36

19

Hampsthwaite Parish Council 1,314.15 1,533.18 1,752.20 1,971.23 Hartwith-cum-Winsley Parish Council 1,316.61 1,536.05 1,755.48 1,974.92 Haverah Park and Beckwithshaw Grouped Parish Council 1,311.49 1,530.07 1,748.65 1,967.24 Hewick and Hutton Grouped Parish Council 1,304.69 1,522.13 1,739.58 1,957.03 High and Low Bishopside Parish Council 1,317.89 1,537.54 1,757.18 1,976.84 Kearby-with-Netherby Parish Council 1,308.00 1,526.00 1,743.99 1,962.00 Killinghall Parish Council 1,305.51 1,523.09 1,740.67 1,958.26 Kirby Hill and District Grouped Parish Council 1,306.63 1,524.40 1,742.17 1,959.95 Kirkby Malzeard, Laverton and Dallowgill Grouped Parish Council 1,319.03 1,538.86 1,758.70 1,978.54 Kirkby Overblow Parish Council 1,317.09 1,536.61 1,756.12 1,975.64 Kirk Deighton Parish Council 1,314.28 1,533.32 1,752.37 1,971.42 Kirk Hammerton Parish Council 1,317.95 1,537.61 1,757.26 1,976.93 Knaresborough Successor Parish Council 1,314.91 1,534.06 1,753.21 1,972.37 Langthorpe Parish Council 1,298.57 1,514.99 1,731.42 1,947.85 Little Ouseburn Grouped Parish Council 1,312.37 1,531.09 1,749.82 1,968.55 Little Ribston Parish Council 1,328.93 1,550.42 1,771.90 1,993.40 Littlethorpe Parish Council 1,309.79 1,528.09 1,746.38 1,964.69 Long Marston Parish Council 1,311.40 1,529.96 1,748.53 1,967.10 Lower Washburn Grouped Parish Council 1,311.21 1,529.74 1,748.27 1,966.81 Markenfield Hall Parish Meeting 1,298.57 1,514.99 1,731.42 1,947.85 Markington with Wallerthwaite Parish Council 1,309.15 1,527.33 1,745.52 1,963.72 Marton-cum-Grafton Parish Council 1,312.05 1,530.73 1,749.40 1,968.08 Marton-le-Moor Parish Council 1,311.19 1,529.72 1,748.25 1,966.79 Masham Grouped Parish Council 1,298.57 1,514.99 1,731.42 1,947.85 Melmerby and Middleton Grouped Parish Council 1,311.61 1,530.20 1,748.80 1,967.41 Mid-Wharfedale Grouped Parish Council 1,306.35 1,524.07 1,741.79 1,959.52 Moor Monkton Parish Council 1,318.43 1,538.17 1,757.90 1,977.65 Newall-with-Clifton Parish Council 1,303.63 1,520.90 1,738.17 1,955.45 Nidd Parish Council 1,315.27 1,534.47 1,753.68 1,972.90 North Deighton Parish Council 1,316.55 1,535.98 1,755.40 1,974.83 North Rigton Parish Council 1,323.02 1,543.52 1,764.02 1,984.53 North Stainley-with-Sleningford Parish Council 1,328.35 1,549.73 1,771.12 1,992.52 Nun Monkton Parish Council 1,349.30 1,574.18 1,799.06 2,023.95 Pannal with Burn Bridge Parish Council 1,316.44 1,535.84 1,755.25 1,974.66 Rainton-with-Newby Parish Council 1,325.21 1,546.08 1,766.94 1,987.82 Ripley Parish Council 1,313.88 1,532.86 1,751.83 1,970.82 Ripon Successor Parish Council 1,346.49 1,570.91 1,795.32 2,019.74 Roecliffe and Westwick Grouped Parish Council 1,334.29 1,556.67 1,779.05 2,001.44 Scotton Parish Council 1,305.54 1,523.13 1,740.71 1,958.31 Scriven Parish Council 1,319.69 1,539.64 1,759.58 1,979.54 Sharow Parish Council 1,322.98 1,543.47 1,763.97 1,984.47 Sicklinghall Parish Council 1,311.32 1,529.87 1,748.42 1,966.98 Skelton Grouped Parish Council 1,321.18 1,541.37 1,761.57 1,981.77 South Stainley-with-Cayton Parish Meeting 1,298.57 1,514.99 1,731.42 1,947.85 Spofforth-with-Stockeld Parish Council 1,311.07 1,529.58 1,748.09 1,966.61 Staveley and Copgrove Grouped Parish Council 1,313.43 1,532.33 1,751.23 1,970.14 Thornthwaite-with-Padside Parish Meeting 1,302.94 1,520.09 1,737.25 1,954.41 Thornville Parish Meeting 1,298.57 1,514.99 1,731.42 1,947.85 Thruscross Parish Meeting 1,313.92 1,532.90 1,751.89 1,970.88 Tockwith and Wilstrop Grouped Parish Council 1,324.73 1,545.51 1,766.30 1,987.09 Upper Nidderdale Grouped Parish Council 1,320.45 1,540.53 1,760.60 1,980.68 Walkingham Hill with Occaney Parish Meeting 1,298.57 1,514.99 1,731.42 1,947.85 Washburn Grouped Parish Council 1,317.45 1,537.02 1,756.59 1,976.17

20

Wath and Norton Conyers Grouped Parish Council 1,320.30 1,540.35 1,760.39 1,980.45 Weeton Parish Council 1,305.16 1,522.68 1,740.21 1,957.74 Whixley Parish Council 1,313.89 1,532.86 1,751.84 1,970.83 Wighill Parish Council 1,306.93 1,524.75 1,742.57 1,960.40

All other parts of the Council's area 1,298.57 1,514.99 1,731.42 1,947.85

94 – HARROGATE DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN - ADOPTION: At the invitation of the Mayor the Chief Executive outlined the process for the adoption of the Harrogate District Local Plan. In order to commence the debate on the matter the Mayor would call for a mover and seconder of Cabinet minute 106/19 of its meeting held on 3 March 2020.

Once the proposals had been moved and seconded Council would be asked to consider an amendment which had been previously notified. As the Minutes of Cabinet had been distributed to all Members after circulation of the formal summons for the meeting Members would be able to propose amendments at the meeting without notice.

The Chief Executive then referred to advice previously issued by the Head of Legal and Governance. Members were advised that they were being asked to vote for the Local Plan as a whole and were not being asked to approve development on individual sites. Rather Members were being asked to vote for the allocations and policies against which future applications would be determined at a later stage through the planning process.

Speaking out against an allocation or a particular policy would not prejudice a Member’s right to vote for the overall plan. Members wishing their objection to a particular allocation to be noted would have the opportunity to request this during the debate. The schedule below lists such requests

Schedule of site objections notified during the meeting Name Sites Councillor Philip Broadbank Kingsley Road Councillor Richard Cooper Dragon Road Car park Kingsley Road Councillor Sid Hawke Ripon Barracks Councillor Phil Ireland K25 Gypsy and Traveller site – Cass Lane Councillor John Mann PN18 Councillor Pat Marsh Gypsy and Traveller site Councillor Stuart Martin Ripon Barracks site Councillor Pauline McHardy Ripon Barracks site Councillor Samantha Mearns K24 Councillor Nigel Middlemass Kingsley Road Councillor Tim Myatt H22 and H63 Councillor Nigel Simms Ripon Barracks Councillor Christine Willoughby K25 – Highfield Farm

Members were reminded of the importance of paying regards to their obligations to

21 declare any interests and act on the advice given as to the impact of those interests on a Member’s ability to participate in the debate and vote on the matter. ‘Dual- hatted’ Members who served on both Harrogate Borough Council and North Yorkshire County Council had been granted a dispensation by the Monitoring Officer which enabled them to remain in the meeting room, participate in the debate and vote on the item. Those Members granted a dispensation were detailed under minute 76/19.

Members were also reminded that any decision on which land should be allocated must be made on the basis of the planning best interests of the area and specifically that the Council’s, County Council’s or a neighbouring authority’s interest in any land was not a relevant consideration. In terms of HBC land holdings then this related to Dragon Road car park (site ref H63), land at Pannal (PN18 – employment allocation) and Harlow nurseries (site ref H65). Likewise the County Council’s or other neighbouring authority’s interests in land were not relevant considerations.

The Chief Executive advised that the Plan had gone through a very detailed process of preparation, analysis and consultation. A sustainability appraisal had been carried out which had assessed the reasonable alternatives to the policies and allocations included in the plan and finally it had been examined by a Planning Inspector who had found it to be legally compliant and sound, which meant it was positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy. The plan should be considered in its entirety otherwise it would fail the test of soundness. The Chief Executive concluded by saying that without an up to date plan there would be a presumption in favour of approving planning applications which would mean the Council would not be in a position to control the location of development within its area.

Moved by Councillor Rebecca Burnett Seconded by Councillor Richard Cooper

That Cabinet Minute 106/19 of 3 March 2020 be approved and adopted.

Council then debated adoption of the Local Plan.

The Mayor advised that notification of an amendment had been received. Before the amendment was moved and debate commenced the Mayor invited the Principal Planning Lawyer to comment.

The Principal Planning Lawyer then advised Council on the risks of not adopting Policy DM4. Paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework would apply which would create an assumption in favour of granting planning permission and the Council would lose control of the planning process. Furthermore, there would be a possibility that the Secretary of State would intervene and direct that the Local Plan be adopted.

Moved by Councillor Ann Myatt Seconded by Councillor Norman Waller

“That the Local Plan be adopted, including the principle of having a new settlement but without the inclusion of the broad location of growth at Green Hammerton / Cattal until Council has had the opportunity for a full debate and

22

vote on the site of the broad location of growth.”

The amendment was then debated. The Leader referred to Councillors Myatt and Waller who represented wards which were disproportionately affected by the Local Plan. The Councillors had worked hard in speaking up for the residents of those wards and the Leader expressed his respect for the good work they were doing as ward members.

Upon a vote being taken the Mayor declared the amendment lost.

A vote was then taken on the substantive motion and it was

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet Minute 106/19 of 3 March 2020 be approved and adopted.

95 – THE MAKING OF THE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN: Moved by Councillor Rebecca Burnett Seconded by Councillor Victoria Oldham and RESOLVED:

That (1) the Otley Neighbourhood Plan 2018-2028, be ‘made’ and form part of the Local Development Plan for Harrogate District for the purposes of development management decisions in those parts of the District within the Otley Neighbourhood Area, (small parts of Lower Washburn and Mid Wharfedale Parish Councils) pursuant to section 38A of The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended); and

(2) the Council publish a Decision Statement which sets out its reasons for the decision as set out at paragraph 5.4 of the report.

96 – MAYORALTY 2020/21: In accordance with Council procedures, the Leader of the Ripon Independent Group, Councillor Pauline McHardy, submitted the nominations of Councillor Trevor Chapman for Mayor of the Borough for the ensuing year, and Councillor Christine Willoughby as Deputy Mayor for the ensuing year.

Members warmly applauded the nominations and the Mayor added his own congratulations to the Mayor and Deputy Mayor elect.

97 – PUBLICATION OF LOCAL PAY POLICY 2020/21: Moved by Councillor Graham Swift Seconded by Councillor Richard Cooper and RESOLVED:

That the report and recommendations of the Head of Organisational Development and Improvement, in connection with the publication of the Statement of Pay Policy for 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021, as required by the Localism Act 2011, be approved and adopted.

23

98 – COMMON SEAL: Moved by Councillor Richard Cooper Seconded by Councillor Graham Swift and RESOLVED:

That (1) the Common Seal of the Council be affixed to the Deeds and Documents necessary to carry out the resolutions confirmed and passed this day; and

(2) no deed shall be treated as being conditional upon Council proceeding until completion of a transaction relevant to any Deeds.

24