Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

CHOMHAIRLE CHONTAE NA GAILLIMHE

MINUTES OF MONTHLY MEETING OF COUNTY COUNCIL HELD AT ÁRAS AN CHONTAE, ON MONDAY 25th JANUARY, 2016 AT 11.00 A.M.

CATHAOIRLEACH: Cllr. P. Roche Cathaoirleach of the County of Galway

I LATHAIR FREISIN: Cllrs. T.Broderick, D.Burke, J.Byrne, N.Byrne, S.Canney, J.Charity, D. Connolly, M. Connolly, S.O’Cualáin, J.Cuddy, S.Cunniffe, T.O’Curraoin, S.Donnellan, A.Donohue, M. Fahy, P. Feeney, G.Finnerty, M.Finnerty, T.Healy, M. Hoade, P.Hynes, D.Joyce, F.Kearney, P.Keaveney, D.Killilea, M.Kinane, M.Maher, E.Mannion, J. McClearn, K.McHugh, T.McHugh, M.Noone, A.Rabbitte, N.Thomas, S.O’Tuairisg, S.Walsh, T.Welby.

Baill: Oifigigh: Mr. K. Kelly, Chief Executive (Interim); Messrs. J. Cullen, L. Gavin, P. Gavican, Directors of Services; Ms. C. McConnell, Acting Director of Service; Mr. G. Mullarkey, Head of Finance; Mr. M. Owens, County Secretary & Meetings Administrator; An tUas. P. O’Neachtain, Oifigeach Gaeilge; Ms. G. Healy, Staff Officer.

Thosnaigh an cruinniú leis an paidir.

RESOLUTIONS OF SYMPATHY 2125

Comh. Ó Tuairisg extended his sympathy to the parents and family of the late Declan Clyne who died tragically as a result of an accident recently. He stated that Declan was a former pupil of his and he was deeply saddened by the tragic news of his passing in the prime of his life.

1

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

Comh. Ó Cualáin wished to be associated with the Resolution of Sympathy to the family of the late Declan Clyne.

A resolution of sympathy was also extended to the following:

Mr. Máirtín Ó Toole, Cill Chiaráin, Conamara, Co. na Gaillimhe. Marguerite & Paul Mellett, Lakeview, , , Co. Galway. Mrs. Carmel Walsh & Family, The Gables, Liskeavy, Milltown, , Co. Galway. Cllr. Sean Canney, Claretuam, Tuam, Co. Galway. Ms. Teresa Healy, , , Co. Galway. The Gill Family, Keamsella, , Co. Galway. Mrs. Mary Canney, Belclare, Tuam, Co. Galway. Mrs. Geraghty, Derrymore, Caherlistrane, Co. Galway. Ms. Kay Ryder, Main Street, , Co. Galway. Ms. Kathleen Burke, Knockdoe, , Co. Galway. Ms. Bernadette Keane, Mullacuttra, Claregalway, Co. Galway. Mr. John Mara, The Quay, , Co. Galway. Mr. & Mrs. Clyne & Family, Cor na Rón, , Co. Galway Ms. Rose Burke, Ballymote, Tuam, Co. Galway. Ms. Marie Clarke, Foxhall, Gurtymadden, , Co. Galway. Mr. Gerry Flynn, Drim, Kylebrack, Loughrea, Co. Galway.

The Cathaoirleach extended his congratulations to the Abbeyknockmoy Hurling Team who had progressed into the All- Intermediate Hurling Final to be played in Croke Park on Sunday 7th February, 2016 and he wished them luck and success in the All-Ireland stating that they had brought great honour and pride to their parish.

Cllr. Donohue stated that he wished to bring an issue of concern to the Members attention. He said that a Meeting was held in Clonfert recently to discuss a planning application which had been lodged with the Council in relation to the development of a windfarm in the area. He said that Members of the Council were invited to attend and that also Members of the Oireachtas were present. His concern was that a Galway East T.D. who was present at the Meeting made a misleading comment that Galway Co. Council was on its knees financially due to the flooding event which occurred the previous month and the Deputy insinuated that as a result of financial difficulties, the Council might be influenced as regards a planning decision regarding the windfarm. He said that these remarks were misleading the public and the Deputy in question should apologise to the Council and the people who attended the Meeting. He also said that it was important that the public should be aware that expenditure incurred as a result of the flooding event would be recouped to the Council.

2

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

The Chief Executive said that planning decisions are made only in the context of the County Development Plan and, in the case of windfarm development, the Council’s Wind Energy Strategy.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF THE MONTHLY MEETING HELD ON 16th DECEMBER 2015. 2126

The Minutes of the Monthly Meeting of the Council held on 16th December 2015, were approved by the Council and signed by the Cathaoirleach, on the proposal of Cllr. Maher, seconded by Cllr. T. McHugh.

Arising from the Minutes, Cllr. Fahy asked if any progress had been made regarding the proposal he made at the December Meeting that the Council make a submission to the Department of the to extend the Gaeltacht area to include all of South Galway.

Mr. Owens replied by outlining a Briefing Document regarding Gaeltacht Areas Status which had been prepared for the information of the Members as a result of Cllr. Fahy’s proposal, as follows:

GAELTACHT AREA DESIGNATION

Gaeltacht areas have in the past been designated by Government order under the Ministers And Secretaries (Amendment) Act, 1956. Orders were made under this Act in 1956, 1967, 1974 and 1982. These areas constitute the current Gaeltacht areas nationwide.

The Act stipulates that the Government may from time to time by order determine to be Gaeltacht areas specified areas, being substantially Irish-speaking areas and areas contiguous thereto which, in the opinion of the Government, ought to be included in the Gaeltacht with a view to preserving and extending the use of Irish as a vernacular language.

Following consultation with the Department of Arts, Heritage & Gaeltacht for the purposes of this briefing document, it is not intended to add to the Gaeltacht Areas at the moment and the focus is on the more recent legislation, i.e. the .

ACHT NA GAELTACHTA 2012 - GAELTACHT ACT 2012

Acht na Gaeltachta 2012 has two primary objectives, namely, to provide for a new definition for the Gaeltacht and to make amendments to the structure and functions of Údarás na Gaeltachta.

Under the Gaeltacht Act 2012, it is envisaged that the Gaeltacht will in future be based on linguistic criteria instead of on geographic areas which has been the position to date. Language planning at community level will be central to the new definition of the Gaeltacht. Areas located outside the 3

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

existing statutory Gaeltacht will be given the opportunity to achieve statutory recognition as Networks or as Gaeltacht Service Towns, subject to fulfilling particular criteria.

A statutory footing for the language planning process is provided in Acht na Gaeltachta 2012, which sets out the process by which communities in various areas can attain recognition as Gaeltacht Language Planning Areas, Gaeltacht Service Towns or Irish Language Networks.

Gaeltacht Language Planning Areas In line with the provisions of the Act, the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht has identified 26 Gaeltacht Language Planning Areas. Under the Act, the existing Gaeltacht will be re-designated as Gaeltacht Language Planning Areas provided that language plans are agreed by the communities in the various areas in accordance with the language planning criteria prescribed under the Act. Údarás na Gaeltachta is responsible under the Act for supporting organisations with regard to the preparation and implementation of the language plans in the Gaeltacht Language Planning Areas.

Gaeltacht Service Towns Gaeltacht Service Towns are towns in, or adjacent to, Gaeltacht Language Planning Areas which play a significant role in the delivery of public services and leisure, social and commercial amenities to those areas. Under the Act, a town must have a population of at least 1,000 people, according to the most recent census, to be considered as a Gaeltacht Service Town. Údarás na Gaeltachta or Foras na Gaeilge are responsible under the Act for supporting organisations in the preparation and implementation of language plans in the Gaeltacht Service Towns, depending on whether the town is situated within or outside Gaeltacht Language Planning Area. On foot of a consultation process conducted over the summer of 2014, the following towns have been selected by the DAHG as possible Gaeltacht Service Towns – conditional on language plans being agreed with the communities of the various towns in accordance with the prescribed language planning criteria under Acht na Gaeltachta 2012.

County Town Donegal Letterkenny,An Clochán Liath (Dungloe) and Donegal Town. Mayo Béal an Mhuirthead (Belmullet),Castlebar and Ballinrobe. Galway Galway City and Kerry Daingean Uí Chúis, Tralee and Cahersiveen Cork Cork City and Macroom Waterford Dungarvan Meath Athboy and Navan

The DAHG has agreed with Údarás na Gaeltachta and Foras na Gaeilge to commence the process with the towns of Letterkenny, Galway City and Daingean Uí Chúis.

Irish Language Networks Irish Language Networks are areas which already have a basic critical mass of community and State support for the Irish language. Foras na Gaeilge is responsible under the Act for supporting organisations in the preparation and implementation of the language plans in the Irish Language Networks. 4

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

Gaeilge Locha Riach approved as Irish Language Network Applicant Following guidance from the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Acht na Gaeltachta 2012 Foras na Gaeilge requested expressions of interest in December 2014 for prospective applicants to prepare and implement language plans in areas which would be suitable for Irish Language Networks. The areas in question shall have community support for the Irish language and would, therefore, benefit from state support for Irish.

On the 11 December the Board of Foras na Gaeilge approved the application of Gaeilge Locha Riach to proceed to the next stage of the selection process.

Gaeilge Locha Riach will be required prepare a language plan in the next stage of the process. The applicants will have to plan, develop and agree all aspects of the plan with all interested parties in their own areas. These plans will seek to increase the use of Irish in their areas within families, in the communit y, in education, in social life, in business and throughout the public sector.

Foras na Gaeilge will submit all plans to the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht for approval. Under Acht na Gaeltachta 2012, the Minister shall issue an order designating this area as an Irish Language Network.

The language planning process with Gaeilge Locha Riach has continually been supported by Galway County Council over a number of years.

Mr. Owens informed the Members that this Briefing Document was available to the Members on the Extranet.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD ON 14TH JANUARY 2015. 2127

The Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Council held on 14th January 2016, were approved by the Council and signed by the Cathaoirleach, on the proposal of Cllr. Kearney, seconded by Cllr. J. Byrne.

Arising from the Minutes, Cllr. D. Connolly referred to the Council’s submission to the Government for funding in the amount of €14.7m to deal with the aftermath of the recent flooding event and Storm Desmond. He expressed concern that only €1m has been received to date from the Department of the Environment, Community & Local Government (DOECLG) in response to the Council’s submission.

Mr. Gavin replied that of the €14.7m which the Council applied for, €2.3m is in respect of mobility and clean-up works and this area is being dealt with by the National Fire & Emergency Section of the DOECLG. He said that the Council has claimed €1m of this €2.3m and the remaining will be claimed at the appropriate time.

5

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

Cllrs. G. Finnerty and D. Connolly expressed their concern regarding the financial hardship suffered by farmers whose lands and livestock were affected by the flooding and Cllr. J. Byrne said that he welcomed the fact that the Minister for the Environment is investigating this situation at present.

Cllr. Hoade asked that a Report be provided at the next Meeting of the Council regarding OPW proposals in respect of small flood relief schemes.

In reply to Cllr. Cuddy, the Chief Executive said that discussions have continued with two parties who had expressed an interest in the future use of the site of the former Airport at Carnmore, however he said that no proposal has been forthcoming.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS 2128

The Report of the Economic Development & Enterprise SPC Meeting held on 8th September, 2015 was approved by the Council on the proposal of Cllr. T. McHugh, seconded by Cllr. Hoade.

Arising from the Minutes, Cllr. Canney said he was concerned at the lack of progress regarding the LEADER programme and asked for an update on when groups could apply for funding for projects under the programme. He said that many groups have projects ready to start but they have no other funding sources except LEADER funding.

Ms. McConnell stated that Galway County Local Community Development Committee (LCDC) is applying to be the Local Action Group (LAG) for and is involved in developing the Local Development Strategy for consideration by the National Evaluation Committee. The date for submission of the Strategy was extended to the 29th February 2016 and the decision of the Evaluation Committee will hopefully be known by March. She said that if the Strategy was successful, it would then be in order for Groups to apply for LEADER funding, in accordance with the Local Development Strategy.

Cllr. Welby said that he is on the Board of Forum and that the Forum is awaiting the completion of the Local Economic Community Plan (LECP) before formulating its proposal for LEADER funding, because any proposal must be in accordance with the LECP.

Ms. McConnell replied that the LECP has been completed and was submitted to the Regional Assembly the previous week for approval.

Also arising from the Minutes, Cllr. Healy referred to the Tourism Strategy which had been presented to the SPC by Ms. Teresa O’Reilly of the Council’s Planning Department. He said that the Tourism Strategy was excellent and he urged the other Members to engage with Ms. O’Reilly in relation to any tourism initiatives which had potential to increase tourism in their areas. 6

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

TO CONSIDER AND IF DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO AUTHORISE THE ATTENDANCE AT TRAINING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 142(5A) OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2001 (as amended) 2129

[Report dated 19th January, 2016 already made available to the Members on the extranet]

It was proposed by Cllr. T. McHugh, seconded by Cllr. Maher, and agreed, that the attendance of the Members named hereunder at the AILG Training entitled Councils and Public Safety to be held at the Hillgrove Hotel, Monaghan on 11th February 2016, be authorized:

Cllrs. Donohue, Donnellan, J. Byrne, Fahy, Hynes, McClearn and Maher.

TO CONSIDER AND IF DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO AUTHORISE THE ATTENDANCE AT CONFERENCES, MEETINGS, OTHER EVENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 142(5) OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2001 (as amended) 2130

[Report dated 20th January, 2016 already made available to the Members on the extranet]

Cllr. Walsh declared an interest in this item and left the Meeting for the duration of its consideration and then returned to the Meeting.

It was proposed by Cllr. Kearney, seconded by Cllr. Hoade, and agreed, that the attendance of the Members named hereunder at the Conference entitled “Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 - ‘Everything you need to know’ to be held at the Mount Errigal Hotel, Letterkenny, on 12th - 14th February, 2016 be authorized.

Cllr. Donohue.

TO NOTE THE SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS OF CONFERENCES ATTENDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 142(5F) OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2001 (as amended) 2131

[Report dated 19th January 2016 already made available to the Members on the extranet]

It was proposed by Cllr. McClearn, seconded by Cllr. N. Byrne, and agreed, to note the Summaries of Proceedings at Conferences, as follows:

 The Finance Act 2015 - as submitted by Cllrs. Fahy and Hynes.

7

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 141(1) OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2001 AS AMENDED ON ACTIVITIES AND OPERATIONS OF BODIES TO WHICH ONE OR MORE THAN ONE MEMBER OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY IS ELECTED, APPOINTED OR NOMINATED BY GALWAY COUNTY COUNCIL 2132

[Report dated 19th January, 2016 was already made available to the Members on the extranet]

On the proposal of Cllr. McClearn, seconded by Cllr. N. Byrne, it was agreed to note the Report on the Activities and Operations of the Local Authority Members Association (LAMA), as submitted by Cllr. T. McHugh.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 2133

On the proposal of Cllr. Mannion, seconded by Cllr. N. Byrne, it was agreed to Suspend Standing Orders in order to allow the items on the Clár to be taken out of sequence.

TO CONSIDER REPORT ON CILL RÓNÁIN HARBOUR 2134

[Report dated 24th January, 2016 was already made available to the Members on the extranet]

The Chief Executive said that further to the request of the Cathaoirleach to have an item relating to Cill Rónáin Harbour placed on the Agenda of the January Meeting of Council he had prepared a report on the issue. He said that although there was no issue on which the Council was required to make a decision, he had endeavoured to provide sufficient information on the history and issues involved so as to aid any discussions which Council may decide to have. He said he was conscious of the fact that all issues pertaining to the relevant Bye-Laws were considered in full by the previous Council at Area Committee, SPC and full Council levels before making any decision, however many of the current Members would not be aware of the history of the process undertaken and therefore this Report dated 24th January 2016 seeks to provide some limited information in order to brief all of the Members.

The Chief Executive outlined the main elements of the Report dated 24th January, 2016, as follows:

Background Prior to the construction of the new harbour at Cill Rónáin, the previous facilities operated in an extremely dangerous manner. All activities including shipment of goods, livestock, vehicles, activities associated with fishing vessels and the arrival of significant volumes of tourists took place on the existing harbour which was completely inadequate to deal with the type and level of activity. The pier surface was congested with parked vehicles, fishing 8

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

equipment and stored cargo. The tour buses operating on the pier contributed to further congestion rendering the area unsafe for all users. Changes were required to bring about safe work practices such as controlling the loading and unloading of cargo, the manner in which cargo was stored, deterring the long term storage of cargo such as building materials at the harbor, the trans-shipment of livestock during periods when the pier was clear of tourists/passengers, restriction on vehicles being parked on the pier for both short term and long term and controlling of tour buses.

In terms of access for vessels there were some tidal issues as well as shelter issues. Passenger vessels, fishing vessels and cargo vessels would avail of the only deep berths at the southern end of the pier. During the summer months this often resulted in enormous demands for the very limited berths. On many occasions passengers would be disembarked across other vessels that were already alongside these berths. The RNLI vessel could not avail of any berth and was moored offshore.

Construction of the new harbour The Contract was signed for the construction of the new harbour development on 17th December 2007 at an estimated cost of €38,903,599.00 + vat. It should be noted that this was a re-measurement contract and not a fixed price contract and therefore the final cost could not be determined in advance. Given the operating environment, the number of variables and the requirement for re-measurement the final cost could only be determined on the completion of the works

Works commenced in early 2008 and substantial completion was confirmed on 2nd November 2011. The harbour remained open all through this period. The final cost of the project was approximately €48m.

This was the most significant project carried out on an offshore island in the history of the State. The works were carried out by the Council with the majority of the funding provided by the Department of the Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht with an understanding that approximately €190,000 would be provided by the Council.

The following works were part of those undertaken during the Harbour re-development:

 Reclamation of approximately 13,500m2 of foreshore for the purpose of parking and traffic marshalling;  Widening of the existing pier by approximately 11m, on the eastside giving additional berthage;  Dredging of approximately 110,000m3 to the harbour and entrance channel to facilitate improved access into the harbour;  Construction of a 550m breakwater. 9

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

 Construction of a new passenger shelter; new CCTV network and new navigational aids  Construction of new tour bus terminal and horse drawn carriage area;  Construction of long and short term parking areas;  Construction of public lighting;  Construction of a new deepwater access slipway 15m wide.

Bye laws

The purpose of the Bye-Laws is to regulate and control activities at the harbour including collecting harbour charges for the purpose of maintaining the harbour and its facilities. Cill Rónáin Harbour has a large numbers of passengers using this harbour currently estimated as being in excess of 200,000 passengers per annum and there are quite a lot of activities occurring within this harbour including movement of passenger vessels, cargo vessels, fishing vessels, recreational crafts, RNLI vessel, as well as other recreational activities. Approximately 8 passenger vessels operate during the busy tourist season some of which undertake multiple trips each day depending on the demand.

The Bye-Laws include a series of charges that apply to all users of the harbour. Different charges apply to the various users of the harbour and are based on the tonnage of the vessel, for cargo and fishing vessels and the length of the vessel for recreational craft. In the case of the passenger vessels a charge per passenger per entry applies ( €0.80 per passenger) with a multi-user charge for those using the service more than five times per annum (multi user including Island residents = €5.00 per annum). The approach of the Council was that the charges collected from the users of Cill Ronain Harbour would be used to pay for the annual costs associated with the running and maintenance of the harbour.

Without Bye-Laws it would prove difficult to manage this uniquely busy harbour. It is obvious throughout the Country and abroad that Bye-Laws are essential to implement the management plans of harbours, and to ensure that activities on the harbour do not present a danger or other problems for harbour users.

Currently we have just one full time Harbour Master managing the harbour. Two outdoor Council staff assist the Harbour Master most mornings for a number of hours in maintaining the harbour with assistance from others if required. The essential requirements of controlling, regulating and maintaining what is essentially a passenger, fishing and cargo harbour ensures a safer, orderly facility for all harbour users and most importantly guarantees to everyone that the harbour will not return to what was an unacceptable and dangerous location.

10

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

Ultimately there is a cost associated with providing this service which must be funded and the means of funding is a payment to be made by the users of the facilities.

Process of development of the Bye-Laws

The draft Bye-Laws were debated extensively at meetings of the Electoral Area Committee and subsequently considered by the Roads and Transportation Strategic Policy Committee. Ultimately the Bye-Laws were considered by full Council. The sequence of events is broadly as follows;

1. The draft Bye-Laws were first presented at a meeting of the Connemara Electoral area held on the 6th September 2010 and the Councillors were advised that the draft Bye-Laws would be the subject of public display and consultation. 2. The Council proceeded to publish a Notice in the papers of its intention to introduce Cill Rónáin harbour Bye-Laws in and around September 2010 after a public meeting on Inis Mór on 14th September 2010. 3. The draft Bye-Laws were further discussed at the meetings of the Connemara Electoral area held on the 30th November 2010 and the 25th January 2011. 4. The Councillors requested a breakdown of the estimated annual operating costs of the new harbour and this information was provided to the Councillors at the meeting of the Connemara Electoral area held on the 22nd February 2011. The Councillors were advised as to how the estimated annual maintenance costs had been calculated and that the cost estimate was used to structure and fairly proportion the rates and charges between the different users of the Harbour. 5. Further presentations on the estimated running costs of Cill Ronain Harbour were given at the Connemara Electoral area meeting held on the 17th June 2011. 6. In or about June 2011 revised draft Bye-Laws were prepared. These revisions came about as a result of the public consultation process during which 187 submissions were received in relation to both the draft Bye-Laws and the draft Traffic Plan. At the meeting of the Connemara Electoral Area held on the 27th June 2011 the Councillors were advised that revised draft Bye-Laws had been prepared. The Councillors were asked to approve the revised draft Bye-Laws and various matters were discussed by the Committee including concessions for the islanders, discounts for regular users, the possible increase of the charges in the future and the methodology of charging in accordance with weight / number of users. Ultimately, the Councillors decided to defer the adoption of the revised draft Bye-Laws. 7. At the meeting of the Connemara Electoral Area on the 2nd September 2011, the Councillors agreed to approve the Cill Ronain Harbour Bye-Laws as presented, subject to clarification on some charges and agreed to the bringing forward of the draft Bye-Laws to the Council meeting scheduled for the 26th September 2011.

11

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

8. A further meeting of the Connemara Electoral Area was held on the 26th September 2011 where the draft Bye-Laws were the subject of more debate. The annual cost of running and maintaining the harbour was outlined to the Councillors and the charges outlined in the draft Bye-Laws that were to be applied to the cargo vessels and the passenger vessels were discussed in detail. 9. On the 26th September 2011 the draft Bye Laws were also debated at the Roads and Transport Strategic Policy Committee. During the course of the meeting the purpose of the draft Bye-Laws was explained to the Committee as was the reason for imposing the charges contained therein. Ultimately it was decided to defer the adoption of the draft Bye-Laws for a period of one month in order to allow for a meeting between council officials and the various interest groups. 10. The Road and Transport Strategic Policy Committee met again on the 24th October 2011 and the matter was again discussed in full. 11. The draft Bye-Laws with proposed amendments thereto were approved by the Roads and Transport Strategic Policy Committee on the 24th October 2011. 12. A meeting of the full Council was also held on the 24th October 2011 and the draft Bye-Laws were considered at this meeting. A number of further amendments were tabled at the full Council meeting to the draft Bye-Laws, including some amendments with regard to the charges. These included the removal of charges in connection with loading and discharging of cargo and fish and the reduction in the passenger charge. The Councillors by resolution voted to adopt the Bye-Laws with the proposed amendments.

It should be noted that among the changes made during this process was the reduction of the proposed charge for passengers from €1.20 to €0.80 and the modification of the charge for residents of the island or frequent travellers to €5.00 per annum.

Court proceedings

Following the adoption of the Bye-Laws Island Ferries Teo (IFT) was successful in being granted leave to apply for a judicial review though the High Court in 2012 on an ex-parte basis.

The judicial review was heard in the Four Courts by Cooke J. over a period of eleven days where both parties gave evidence. The allegations against Galway County Council were three points of law:-

1. The charge was ultra vires above the bye-law making powers of the Council because of the amount charged. 2. The charge was invalid as it is an abuse by the Council of its dominant position as the sole provider of harbour services at Cill Rónain contrary to section 5 of the Competition Act 2002.

12

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

3. The charge is invalid in that it violates rights of IFT that are protected by Articles 6, 15.2, 40.1, 40.3 and 43 of the Constitution. Galway County Council successfully defended the case in the High Court and IFT then appealed the case to the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Judgement

The Supreme Court also found in favour of Galway County Council.

The Supreme Court stated that there is nothing in the judgment of the trial judge (High Court), to suggest that what he characterised as a “modest charge” could not be passed on to passengers. It was noted by the Supreme Court that the trial judge found that it was not correct to argue that the collection of a fee for entry based on passenger numbers places a disproportionate administrative burden on Island Ferries. It was considered that the levying of a fee based on passenger numbers is not characteristic of a tax: it is a standard method of charging for use.

It was noted that the Court had found that “Galway County Council set the charges for Cill Rónáin through a process of debate and analysis within the scope of their delegated governmental function.”

The Supreme court judgment stated that “an enhanced facility has been provided for the use of the islanders and for those who make a living out of the tourist industry. It also benefits visitors” and that “this is of benefit to Island Ferries and is also of benefit to those small businesses making a living out of a very limited tourist season”. The Supreme court agreed with the High Court trial judge who found that value to be considerable, involves no serious additional burden in terms of the counting of numbers to Island Ferries, is a reasonable means of charging and, is no more than the fixing of “a very modest per capita fee of €0.80 on individual passengers arriving most of whom will make the trip only once”. The use of multiple tickets, and a reasonable charge in that regard, protects the interests of islanders who, given their isolation from many other State services are entitled to some compensatory benefit.

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court view that it was perfectly legitimate (and perhaps mandatory) for the Council as legislator to approach the decision to be made and the balancing of interests to be struck, by taking into consideration its other statutory interests and responsibilities.

The Supreme Court concluded that the harbour construction was undertaken to secure social inclusion. It was stated that in no way has any State authority sought to recover through passenger charges the sum involved, which was close to €50 million. Galway County Council, after intense debate, decided to impose a passenger use charge as a way of partially funding the year to year running costs of this new facility. These costs are an essential expenditure to ensure the harbour is run and maintained properly. The charges on 13

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

visitors using the harbour are both modest and reasonable. Galway County Council had ample statutory basis for imposing the charge and the manner in which it did so.

The Supreme Court found that there was no basis, upon which any of the appeal grounds could succeed.

While the substantive issues have been determined by the Supreme Court the Court has yet to deliver it’s judgement on Galway County Councils appeal of the High Court decision to give the Council it’s costs in respect of only 7 of the 11 days of the High Court hearing. The Supreme Court has yet to give it’s judgement in respect of the costs of the Supreme court hearing.

Withdrawal of Service

Following the decision of the Supreme Court – Island Ferries Teo announced that it was going to withdraw its winter service on 16th January 2016. It is understood that it is intended that the service would resume at a later date in the context of the commencement of the tourist season. Island Ferries Teo have since deferred the proposed cessation date to 31st January 2016. There is currently no Public Service Obligation contract in place for Inis Mor and therefore there is nothing to prevent any service provider from ceasing or modifying it’s service at any time.

The Cathaoirleach and Chief Executive of Galway County Council responded to requests for meetings and met with representatives of Island Ferries and ComharChumann Forbartha Arann immediately before and after Christmas.

At a meeting on 6th January 2016 Island Ferries Teo suggested that if the relevant parts of the Bye-Laws were changed/removed including the removal of the per passenger rates in Section 12 they would agree to make a payment per vessel based on a per entry, per month or per annum basis depending on the usage of the vehicle. Island Ferries Teo estimated that their contribution in this scenario would be approximately €10,500 per annum.

Operation and maintenance costs of Cill Rónáin Harbour

During the course of discussions on the draft Bye-Laws the costs for the operation and maintenance of the harbour were estimated at between €150,000 and €200,000 per annum as actual figures were not available.

This was an issue which was subsequently raised in Court and details were placed before the Court. The operating costs of Cill Rónáin’s Harbour in 2012 were outlined in documents which were presented to the Court.

14

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

These may be summarised as follows (rounded )

Costs as per Agresso Accounting System 119,000.00 Indirect Payroll costs apportionment 18,300.00 Foreshore lease 35,000.00 Other 4,300.00 ______176,600.00

I set out hereunder the costs associated with the harbour in the period 2012-2015 following the same approach as that which was used in outlining the costs to the Court

The direct costs as per the Councils Agresso Accounting System for the period 2012 – 2015 is as follows:

2012 2013 2014 2015 Payroll 69,500 64,500 58,500 68,000 Harbour Master and part-time General Operatives Insurance 11,000 9,200 9,200 9,200 Electricity 19,000 20,000 18,500 9,200 Materials /Miscellaneous 18,900 110,720 115,850 79,100

118,400 204,420 202,050 165,500

To these must be added the other categories of costs which are or will be incurred

In the first instance there are indirect payroll costs to be apportioned including engineering supervision and administrative support. For the purpose of this report I have assumed that these costs are lower than in 2012.

The issue in relation to the costs of the foreshore licence have not yet been concluded but the figure of €35,000 per annum is the annual cost as suggested by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government

A significant consideration is that not all maintenance costs can be captured annually. It is important to note that the harsh coastal environment causes rapid wear on facilities such as public lighting, navigational lighting, CCTV network, safety barriers and railings and access ladders and these will need to be replaced at intervals, For example, the public lighting heads need replacement in 2016 due to the corrosive environment. Expenditure such as this is not an annual event but these and other recurring costs while not occurring annually must be provided for at appropriate intervals and this is best achieved by creating a Sinking

15

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

Fund into which an annual payment is made in order to cover these costs. The requirement for such a sinking fund was outlined in documents placed before the Courts. Examples of the type of issues and estimated costs are as follows

The replacement cost of the harbour flood lights (five year cycle) is approximately €45,000 + VAT.

The replacement cost of some of the navigational lights can be as much as €10,000/ unit

Other issues are the maintenance of the old harbour warehouse, operation of the fire pump (not commissioned yet) and the desludging of the cattle holding facility.

There may be further maintenance dredging to both ferry berth 1 and ferry berth 2 due to the proximity of the Cill Rónain beach. The maintenance dredging requirement will arise at intervals and can only be confirmed by surveying the locations. This is an expensive operation due to the mobilisataion of large seaworthy plant and equipment with estimated costs in the region of €75,000 - €100,000 per operation

The replacement of safety rails every 10 years at a cost of approximately €30,000

The replacement of ladders every 15 years at a cost of €8,000 per ladder

Therefore, if the above table takes into account indirect costs, the foreshore lease and a sinking fund for operation and maintenance costs that do not occur annually it would be as follows:

2012 2013 2014 2015 Agresso Costs 119,000 204,000 202,000 165,000 Indirect Payroll Costs 18,300 10,000 10,000 10,000 Foreshore Lease 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 Sinking Fund- Estimated 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Total 192,300 269,000 267,000 230,000

Conclusion

The adoption and implementation of Bye-Laws is a very important power of local authorities and in this case the approach and reasoning of Galway County Council in adopting the Harbour Bye-Laws has been fully examined by the Courts and upheld.

The Bye-Laws in question which have been adopted, tested and have been operational since 2012, provide for the part funding of the operation and maintenance of the new harbour at

16

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

Cill Rónáin through a charge per passenger that the service operator could pass on to the passenger.

Island Ferries Teo having fought the case in Court without success, has indicated that it will cease its service in the winter months. However if it does take this course of action the fees payable under the Bye-Laws will still remain to be paid during the tourist season.

Galway County Council undertook extensive consideration and discussion before adopting the Bye-Laws.

There are a number of matters that require careful consideration which include but are not limited to the following:

 This was an important case for local democracy and local authorities generally upholding the power of Councillors to implement policies and practices that are appropriate for the needs of specific communities.  The precedent that might be set by changing the Bye-Laws to meet the demands of a person/persons opposed to same.  The implication of changing the Bye-Laws for the recoupment of monies already owed on foot of the Bye-Laws since their coming into operation.  The implications of changing the Bye-Laws when the matter effectively stands adjourned in the Courts and our appeal of the High Court decision on costs and the determination on the Supreme Court costs are still awaited.  The implications of any change to the Bye-Laws for further harbour development including Inis Oirr Harbour which is mentioned in the infrastructure and Capital Investment Programme 2016-2021.  There are monies owed to Galway County Council for our legal fees in defending the case in the High Court and the Supreme Court.  Galway County Council is owed monies from the fees introduced by the Bye-Laws for the period 2012 to 2015 which is estimated to amount to in excess of €400,000  Other operators also owe fees and the fee structure imposed is equitable between the various operators and other vessels using harbour. Any change to same carries with it the risk of challenges by one or more categories of such users or any other person affected.  The proposals put forward by Island Ferries Teo. suggest an annual payment of €10,500 which would leave a considerable shortfall when set against the actual annual costs and would in no way provide any significant financial contribution to the annual operating costs as outlined or equate to the significant benefits derived from the use of the facility.

17

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

 The principles and procedures involved have been fully considered by the Courts and found to withstand detailed scrutiny. The current Bye-Laws and method of calculating the charges have been found to be entirely legal and within the powers and competence of the Council.  Galway County Council has invested considerable time and resources over the past seven years to reach this point and there has been no change that would merit the consideration of a different approach.  The change being sought to the Bye-Laws by the operator would, if implemented, leave a significant funding shortfall that would have to be met from existing funds in either the Connemara Municipal District or the County as a whole and most likely from the limited roads budget.  Any changes in the Bye-Laws could be the subject of further legal challenge by any party aggrieved with same.

The Cathaoirleach thanked the Chief Executive for the Report and he acknowledged the presence of Mr. Paddy O’Brien and Ms. Susan O’Brien of Island Ferries Teo at the Meeting and also Ms. Cathy Ní Goill and Mr. Michael Ó Goill of ComharChumann Forbartha Arann.

Comh. Ó Tuairisg said that it is a matter of great concern for the people of Inis Mór that the operator of the ferry service to Cill Rónáin, Island Ferries Teo., has announced that the service will cease on 31st January, 2016 and will not re-commence until the tourist season begins again. He said the islanders deserve a good ferry service to the mainland all-year round and he said that it is past time that the Minister for Gaeltacht Affairs and Natural Resources puts a Public Service Obligation Contract (PSO) in place for Inis Mór to ensure that the operator of the ferry service to Cill Rónain is not in a position to withdraw or alter its service under contract. He said that a PSO contract is already in place in respect of Inis Oirr and Inis Meáin.

Comh. Ó Curraoin said that a fund must be put in place for the Council by the Government to maintain the harbour instead of levying passengers in order to recoup costs.

Cllrs. Healy, Welby, Thomas, McClearn, Hoade, Broderick and Comh. Ó Cualáin felt that the process of putting a PSO in place should be instigated by the Minister immediately to ensure that the ferry service is continued after 31st January, 2016.

In reply to Cllr. Walsh, who expressed concern that the ferry operator might raise the price of ferry tickets, the Chief Executive confirmed that the fees are set in the adopted Bye-Laws for the Regulation of Cill Rónain Harbour and Cill Éinne Harbour (the Bye-Laws) and therefore can only be changed by the Members through a review of the Bye-Laws.

Cllr. Mannion thanked the Chief Executive for the detailed Report and said that the Bye- Laws in place were not adopted lightly by the Members and that numerous meetings were

18

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

held in order to discuss the Bye-Laws. She said that it was felt that the fees which were adopted were fair and just. She said she has great sympathy for the islanders and it is imperative that the service is continued.

Cllr. Mannion made the following proposal “that Galway County Council asks that the Minister with responsibility for the Islands, Minister Joe McHugh, immediately commence the process of establishing a PSO Ferry Service to Inis Mór and furthermore guarantee a service to the Islands from the 31st January 2016”. This proposal was seconded by Cllr. N. Byrne, and agreed.

Cllrs. Maher, Noone and Cuddy supported Cllr. Mannion’s proposal.

The Cathaoirleach said that the County Secretary would send the letter to the Minister of State at the Department of Arts, Heritage & the Gaeltacht (DAHG) with Special Responsibility for Gaeltacht Affairs and Natural Resources in the afternoon and he undertook to contact the Minister by phone after the Meeting. He said he had considerable engagement with Minister McHugh on this issue, as had ComharChuann Arann and he was confident that the Minister would understand the need of the islanders for certainty on this issue.

Cllrs. Broderick and Canney referred to monies outstanding to the Council from the DAHG in relation to improvement works carried out to Kilronan Pier and Caladh Mór Pier between 2004 – 2009.

The Chief Executive said that at the end of 2014 approximately €3.9m was owed to the Council by the DAHG in relation to the improvement works at Inis Mór Pier and approximately €3.2m was owed in respect of Caladh Mór Pier. He said that following discussions between the DAHG and the Council, the DAHG agreed to pay €900,000 to the Council over a three year period, which would be reviewed in 2016. He said that it is hoped that agreement can be reached with the Department for the payment of the outstanding sum.

ADOPTION OF THE “ROAD TRAFFIC SPECIAL SPEED LIMITS COUNTY GALWAY BYE-LAWS, NO. 1 – 2005 (HOUSING ESTATES SLOW ZONES)” . 2135

[Report dated 19th January, 2016 was already made available to the Members on the extranet]

Mr. Gavin referred to the Report and stated that, in accordance with Circular RW12/2015, it is intended to introduce a 30km/h special speed limit in suitable housing estates in the charge of Galway County Council. He said that consultations had taken place at the respective Municipal Districts regarding these proposed Special Speed Limit Bye-Laws. He said that once the Bye-Laws were adopted by the Council, the appropriate signage would be put in place in the relevant housing estates.

19

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

A discussion took place and Mr. Gavin replied to points raised by the Members as follows:

 Mr. Gavin said that this is the first phase of a 3-year programme whereby the Council intends to introduce a 30km/h speed limit in all Council Housing Estates.  The Council received an allocation from the DOECLG and the Department has indicated that a further allocation will be provided in 2016 for the introduction of special speed limits in further housing estates.  Implementation and monitoring of the special speed limits will be a matter for An Garda Síochána but the Council will also have a role.  These speed limits are called special speed limits as they are to be implemented in housing estates and are separate to the road speed limits adopted by the Council to date.

On the proposal of Cllr. Killilea, seconded by Cllr. G. Finnerty, it was agreed to adopt the “Road Traffic Special Speed Limits County Galway By-Laws No. 1 – 2005 (Housing Estates Slow Zones).

TO CONSIDER THE DEFERRAL OF SENDING OF THE STATUTORY NOTICES FOR THE TUAM LOCAL AREA PLAN 2011-2017 UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 19 (1) (d) OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT AS AMENDED. 2136

[Report dated 20th January, 2016 was available on the extranet]

Cllr. T. McHugh noted that there has been very little activity within Tuam since the adoption of the Local Area Plan (LAP) in 2011 and requested the deferral of the sending out of Notice to extend the plan by five years under the appropriate legislation.

Cllr. Killilea concurred and seconded the proposal. As a new elected member since the adoption of the LAP in 2011, Cllr. Killilea sought the following questions to be addressed; 1. As the current LAP was adopted in 2011 to ensure that the current LAP does not contradict the Galway County Development Plan (CDP) 2015-2021; 2. The existing LAP objectives - were they met or are some of them ongoing; 3. Will a public notice be advertised indicating that Galway County Council is not going to undertake a new LAP and there is no new major development going to take place or that the LAP will not interfere with flood risk management? Cllr. Killilea requested that a commitment be made that the local area plan process for a new Local Area Plan for Tuam commence once the motorway is complete, within 18 months to 20 months.

Cllr Cunniffe expressed concern that there was no discussion on the extension of the Tuam Local Area Plan and the Plan’s compatibility with the County Development Plan at the Tuam Municipal District Meeting, which highlighted elected members not having an input into decision making. Cllr Cunniffe advised the Meeting that he was unhappy about the Tuam

20

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

LAP being deferred and he would only support an extension of 18 months and not a 5 year extension of the LAP.

Cllr. K. McHugh agreed with the proposed extension of the Plan if it would save resources. She concurred with Cllr. Cunniffe and said that the item of the LAP extension should have been discussed with the Elected Members at Municipal District Meeting level. She also questioned whether the legislation stated 5 years or could the extension be for 18 months.

Cllr. Canney concurred that the item should have been raised at Municipal District level as there were a number of new Elected Members since the adoption of the Tuam LAP. He said the existing Local Area Plan should remain in place until the new motorway is complete and its consequential effects on Tuam are monitored as this information would better inform the new LAP.

Cllr. Joyce requested that a hard copy of the Tuam LAP be circulated to all Elected Members.

Cllr. Hoade supported the extension of the Tuam LAP and noted that the Planning staff are under pressure.

Cllr. Cunniffe commented that the maximum extension for the Tuam LAP should be 2 years.

Cllr. Killilea requested that it be noted in the Minutes of this Meeting, that the Plan should be revised within 20 months.

Cllr. Canney advised the Meeting that the N17 traffic coming from Galway to Tuam is causing great difficulty for people and this traffic congestion is daily on the RTÉ traffic news. He requested that the traffic lights be synchronised or turned off for 3 hours in the evening time on Thursdays/Fridays to reduce the current traffic tail back to Claretuam (4 miles away). He requested that the financial saving made by Galway County Council by not commencing a new LAP should be utilised in solving the traffic lights problem.

Cllr. Killilea concurred with Cllr. Canney that an update on the Tuam traffic lights was required. He explained that it takes between 2 and3 hours to drive from Galway to Tuam. He requested that the traffic lights should be turned off between the hours of 4-7pm. With regard to the Tuam Local Area Plan, he said that the item should have been first addressed at the Municipal District meeting.

In response, Mr. Gavin, DOS, Roads and Transportation Unit, noted that the N17 Tuam Bypass should be complete by January 2018 and that an interim solution for the traffic congestion could be found and advised that Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) are currently discussing this topic with the Council. He commented that the turning off of the

21

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

traffic lights would require careful consideration as the effect of this on other road users trying to get onto the N17 would have to be reviewed. He noted that the Council would liaise with the Garda to increase the traffic flow through the town at peak times.

Cllr. Canney explained to the Meeting that awaiting the 2018 road openings was too far ahead for a resolution of traffic congestion and that the turning off of the traffic lights should be operated manually if not technically in the meantime. He noted that Galway County Council and Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) should deal with the traffic flow as a matter of urgency.

Cllr Roche concurred with the Elected Members regarding the issue of extending the Tuam LAP by 5 years and that he would take direction from the Planning A/Director of Service to satisfy the Elected Members that the current Tuam LAP was compatible with the CDP and statutory legislation.

Ms. McConnell apologised that the topic of the extension to the Tuam LAP was not discussed at the Tuam Municipal District Meeting but explained that the Planning Authority was restricted by statutory timeframes in relation to the plan extension. She noted that an extension of 18 months to 2 years should see changes to the conditions within Tuam regarding transportation structural change and that change in the economic upturn should kick-start the new LAP. She also noted that all planning applications granted within the Tuam LAP boundary since the plan adoption to present time were surveyed. She explained that the findings of which noted that there was no undeveloped zoned land for various uses developed since the adoption of the Plan. She said it was also noted that a number of objectives of the LAP have not been fully realised and that many still remain unattained.

Ms. McConnell also noted that the potential of Tuam being a hub town and capital of the north of county Galway has yet to be realised. She recommended as outlined in the Chief Executive’s Report to defer the sending of notice of the commencement of a new LAP as many of the current LAP objectives remain valid. She also confirmed that the LAP is in accordance with the current Core Strategy and with the CDP, as a review of both documents was undertaken and that the Planning Authority was satisfied that there was no conflict between both documents. She concurred that the plan’s deferral by 5 years may be too long and confirmed that a public notice would be placed in the local paper with regard to the deferral of notices.

Cllr. T. Mc Hugh said that the proposal should be amended to extend the Tuam LAP for a further 2 years as the roads will be open in 2018. In reply, Ms. McConnell advised the Meeting that it should be noted that by extending the LAP by 2 years, that it would not provide an opportunity for the impacts of the new road openings to be fully assessed.

22

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

In reply to Cllr. T. Mc Hugh, Ms. McConnell confirmed that a Material Amendment could be undertaken on the current Local Area Plan, if required.

On the proposal of Cllr. T. McHugh, seconded by Cllr. Killilea, it was agreed that pursuant to Section 19 (1) (d) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as inserted by Section 12 (a) (iii) of the Planning & Development (Amendment) Act 2010), the Council resolves to defer the sending of a notice under Section 20 (3) (a) (i) of the Act of 2000 and publishing a notice under Section 20 (3) (a) (ii) for a period of 2 years.

TO CONSIDER THE MANAGEMENT REPORT – JANUARY 2016 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 136(2) OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2001 (AS AMENDED). 2137

[Report dated 22nd January, 2016 was already available on the extranet]

In reply to Cllr. Killilea who asked if the closing date for applications for the Gaillimh 2016 – Cuimhneamh Grant Scheme could be extended past Friday 29th January 2016 as communities may not be aware of the grant scheme, Mr. Owens said that timeline was influenced by a desire by community groups to deliver projects for March/April 2016 and to allow for proposals to be received and assessed to allow for recommendations to be brought before the February meeting of Council. He advised that the closing date was set for prior to the launch of the Community Support Scheme 2016 in order to avoid confusion between the two schemes. He said that the Council has advertised the Grant Scheme on the website via social media, in the local press and by direct communication through the Public Participation Network and Heritage Forum, however he said that further publicity and awareness around the closing date would be promoted during the coming week.

Mr. Owens said that a maximum grant of €5,000 is available for a artwork/sculpture in each Municipal District to serve as a permanent reminder and legacy of the centenary commemorations of the 1916 Rising. He said that communities were encouraged to submit collaborative projects, that reflect the history of the communities and their ties to 1916. He advised that the Community Support Scheme for 2016 would also facilitate applications for funding for projects associated with 1916.

On the proposal of Cllr. Killilea, seconded by Cllr. Maher, the Management Report – January 2016 was noted by the Members.

TO CONSIDER THE AUDIT COMMITTEE’S REPORT TO COUNCIL ON ITS CONSIDERATION OF THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT AND AUDITOR’S REPORT 2014 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 121 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2001, AS AMENDED. 2138

[Report was available to the Members on the extranet]

23

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

Cllr. Canney asked for clarification as to the exact amount owed to the Council by the Department of Arts, Heritage & the Gaeltacht (DOAHG) in relation to improvement works carried out to Kilronan Pier and Caladh Mór Pier.

The Chief Executive said that the amount owed to the Council by the DOAHG as per the audit report for 2014 was €7.1m as the Department agreed to pay €900,000 to the Council over a three year period, which would be reviewed in 2016.

Cllr. Canney said that if the DAHG does not agree to repay the €7.1m to the Council, a mediator should be introduced in order that agreement be reached between the two parties. He said it was his understanding that the Council paid the final account monies to the contractors with the approval of the Department.

The Chief Executive said it should be noted that this was a re-measurement contract and not a fixed price contract and therefore the final cost could not be determined in advance. Given the operating environment, the number of variables and the requirement for re- measurement, the final cost of the projects could only be determined on the completion of the works. He also said that the DAHG had recouped the full costs of other projects which involved a re-measurement contract and not a fixed price contract, to the Council, but unfortunately, on the completion of this contract, the Department did not agree to recoup the full cost to the Council. However, he said it is hoped that agreement can be reached with the Department for the payment of the outstanding sum, even if it were over an agreed period. He clarified that the DAHG has not indicated that they are refusing to pay the outstanding sum because of any deficiency in the management of the contract.

He said it should also be noted that this was the most significant project carried out on an offshore island in the history of the State. The works were carried out by the Council with the majority of the funding provided by the Department of the Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht with an understanding that approximately €190,000 would be provided by the Council.

He also said that the Council is owed this money from the DAHG and will continue to seek the payment of the amount outstanding.

In reply to Cllr. Welby, the Chief Executive said that there were elements of arbitration with the Contractor in terms of the capital sums, however it was his understanding that the final payment was a very small amount compared to the extra amount originally claimed by the Contractor.

24

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

Cllr. J. Byrne said that the Council would have been required to pay the Final Account to the Contractor but he could not understand why the DAHG has not agreed to repay the full amount to the Council.

In reply to Cllr. Broderick, the Chief Executive said that the vast majority of the net surplus shown in the Capital Account derives from landfill monies. As outlined at previous Meetings of the Council, it was a requirement that monies derived from the landfill were set aside for the ongoing maintenance of the landfill site into the future and the identified excess monies were allocated to capital projects by the Ballinasloe Town Council .

In reply to Comh. Ó Cualáin, the Chief Executive said that a more detailed design of the Galway City Transport Project route has been progressed in recent months and discussions have taken place with landowners. Detailed environmental reports are currently being finalised and the relevant development plans are being examined. He said that the Members would be updated on the project in the coming months.

In reply to Cllr. Broderick, Mr. Gavican said that certain specialised equipment for the fire service is only available from sole-suppliers, however the Council keeps an eye out for other suppliers coming on the market. He said that procurement policy facilitates the process the Council uses for the procurement of specialised fire equipment.

It was unanimously agreed to note the Audit Committee’s Report to Council on its consideration of the Audited Financial Statement and Auditor’s Report 2014

TO FIX A DATE AND TIME FOR THE FEBRUARY MEETING 2139

It was agreed that the February Monthly Meeting of Plenary Council be held on Monday 29th February, 2016 at 11 a.m.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S BUSINESS & CORRESPONDENCE 2140

The following items of correspondence which were circulated at the meeting were noted:

 Correspondence from Offaly County Council dated 22nd January 2016 passing a resolution that “Offaly County Council calls on the Minister for Education to introduce as a matter of urgency, a module in National Schools throughout Ireland which would make it compulsory to each mindfulness and coping mechanisms as part of the school curriculum for all Primary Children and that the necessary teacher training is provided”.  Correspondence from the Department of Arts, Heritage & the Gaeltacht dated 12th January 2016 noting the resolution of Galway County Council in relation to the provision of a secure ferry service for the people of Inis Mór.

25

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

 Correspondence from the Department of Arts, Heritage & the Gaeltacht dated 5th January 2016 acknowledging receipt of Galway County Councils letter to Minister Heather Humphreys relating to the ferry service to Inis Mór.  Correspondence from the Department of Children and Youth Affairs dated 31st December 2015 concerning funding in respect of Lets Play Programme and details on the Capital Grant Scheme for Play and Recreation.  Correspondence from the Department of Arts, Heritage & the Gaeltacht dated 4th January 2016 acknowledging receipt of Galway County Councils recent correspondence to Minister Heather Humphreys in connection with the ferry service to Inis Mór.  Correspondence from the Department of Arts, Heritage & the Gaeltacht dated 4th January 2016 acknowledging receipt of Galway County Councils recent correspondence to Minister Heather Humphrey’s in connection with the unblocking of swallow holes in the south Galway area.  Correspondence from the Department of Arts, Heritage & the Gaeltacht dated 5th January 2016 acknowledging receipt of Galway County Councils recent latter to Minister Joe Mc Hugh, regarding An Caladh Mór in Inis Meáin.  Correspondence from the Department of Children and Youth Affairs dated 23rd December 2015 acknowledging receipt of Galway County Councils correspondence concerning funding in respect to Lets Play Programme.  Correspondence from the Valuation Office dated 22nd December 2015 acknowledging receipt of Galway County Council’s resolution expressing dissatisfaction with the outcome of the recent global revaluations of a number of public utility undertakings and its somewhat surprise at same.

CATHAOIRLEACH’S BUSINESS 2141

Cllr. Donnellan asked if there was any update regarding the proposed Ballinasloe to Galway Greenway and Mr. Gavin replied that, as outlined to the Members at a number of Meetings of the Council in 2015, the DOEHLG made a decision to stall this project following extensive discussions which took place with affected landowners and Mr. Gavin said that the Council will not be in a position to revisit this project until the DOEHLG makes a further decision on the matter.

In reply to Cllrs. Mannion and Healy, Mr. Gavin said that a condition of the planning permission for the N59 Roadworks Scheme was that the Council liaise with the NPWS regarding the work programme and the Council is awaiting their response in order to proceed further with the project. He assured the Members of the Council’s commitment to getting this roads project carried out.

Mr. Gavin also replied to Cllr. Mannion that works on the Marconi Project at Clifden would be completed in early summer.

26

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

In reply to Cllr. Rabbitte, Mr. Gavin said that the Council is in discussion with the OPW as to how to proceed with the flood alleviation channel at Cahermore as the OPW has the expertise in this area.

Cllr. J. Byrne said he was satisfied that proposal for flood alleviation works at Cahermore were moving in the right direction and in a timely manner.

Cllr. Killilea made the following proposal “that Galway County Council change the bye-laws in relation to residential on-street parking. There is an occasion where a resident cannot hold a parking permit if he or she owns a commercial car or van. I would ask that this be done in the next 8 weeks.

This proposal was seconded by Cllr. M. Connolly.

Mr. Gavin advised that Cllr. Killilea discuss this issue with him initially before putting forward this proposal.

A request from Cllr. Killilea and Cllr. M. Connolly to withdraw their proposal was agreed.

Cllr. Healy made the following proposal “that Galway County Council state on the record and communicate its concerns to the Department of the Marine on the issue of “Super Trawlers” operating without oversight or enforcement off the coast of Galway. While Irish fishermen are monitored and regulated to the word of the law, the state has failed to ensure proper monitoring and enforcement of non-Irish fishing vessels in Irish seas. In line with concerns around the conservation of existing stock of fish and the preservation of endangered species, we ask that the Department consider the banning of “Super Trawlers” in Irish seas, following the example Australia has set in banning these vessels”.

This proposal was seconded by Cllr. D. Connolly.

It was agreed to allow the Motion to be considered.

Cllrs. Mannion, Comh. Ó Cualáin and Ó Curraoin expressed their support of Cllr. Healy’s motion.

Following discussion, the Motion as proposed by Cllr. Healy, seconded by Cllr. D. Connolly was agreed.

Cllr. Killilea made the following proposal “that Galway County Council in the next 4 weeks hold a series of information meetings in our major towns and listen to the local knowledge that residents have in relation to relieving flooding issues in their areas”. This proposal was seconded by Cllr. Rabbitte.

Following a brief discussion, a request from Cllr. Killilea and Cllr. Rabbitte to withdraw their Motion on the basis that details of proposals by local communities to address issues relating

27

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

to flooding in their areas would be submitted to the Roads, Transportation & Marine Unit, was agreed.

NOTICES OF MOTION

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 15 – CLLR. J. CHARITY 2142

The Cathaoirleach called Notice of Motion No. 15 submitted by Cllr. Charity “that in an effort to improve the transparency of Council Meetings and the accountability of Elected Members to voters, Galway County Council introduces live online streaming of all Council Meetings in future.” However it was indicated that Cllr. Charity was not present due to work commitments.

Cllr. McHugh asked if Cllr. Charity had received a written reply to the Notice of Motion.

Cllr. J. Byrne expressed the view that the Council Meetings were very accountable and transparent as representatives from the print media and the local radio station are present at the Meetings to keep the public informed and also the Council provides tweets throughout the whole meeting.

Cllr. Hynes agreed and said that the Minutes of the Monthly Meetings are also available on the Council’s Website for the public to view.

Cllr. Healy stated that he understood that the Council has concerns regarding live streaming, but he said a 20 minute delay could be arranged. He said that Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council provide live streaming of their Council Meetings. He said he felt that the Members would agree that it is the responsibility of elected representatives to reach out and make the public aware of the business carried out at Council Meetings and to encourage people to engage with politics. He expressed the view that the Council’s I.T. Staff could connect the audio system to the server, and with the appropriate delay, an audio of the Council Meetings could be made available to the wider public.

Mr. Owens clarified that Cllr. Charity’s Notice of Motion was first put down in June 2015 and he received a response in writing as follows: “The information and audio visual systems now available in the extended Council Chamber can facilitate the broadcast of Council Meetings. In order to introduce same, the installation of additional equipment to enable the broadcast is required with an estimated cost of €10,000. In addition, it will be necessary to consider a mechanism to ensure compliance with data protection issues associated with the broadcast of Meetings, with the potential for additional costs”.

Mr. Owens referenced the previous discussions in relation to same by Plenary Council and the request that quotations be sought in relation to inform further consideration of the proposal. Mr. Owens advised that arising from same, quotations were sought, during the period July – September 2015 and a single quotation was submitted in the amount of 28

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

€14,056.23. He confirmed that additional costs would arises in relation to the streaming platform and the staff resource required to operate the system during meetings, noting the requirement for a delay to address any issues relation to Data Protection that may arise. Mr. Owens clarified that responsibility for statements by the Members rested with the Members and the operation of a delay on the streaming of meeting did not transfer any liability arising from such statement from the Members to the Executive.

Mr. Owens in reply to Cllr. Mannion, confirmed that in the absence of Cllr. Charity, Standing Orders allowed for the motion to be moved by another Member on the basis of a written request from Cllr. Charity. He indicated that he was not aware of such a request and accordingly the motion was not before the Members for consideration.

In reply to Cllr. Broderick, he indicated that as the Motion was not before the Members, it was not possible for Members to propose an amendment to the Motion. In reply to Cllr. Healy, he confirmed that it was possible for a Member to submit a proposal under Cathaoirleach’s Business with the consent of the majority of the Members present and in the event that such a Motion proceeded to a vote, that a majority of the Members must vote in favour, subject to a minimum of 19 votes in favour.

Cllr. Killilea proposed “that Galway County Council write a letter to Irish TV to ask them for advice of live or recorded TV and we look at live streaming in six months’ time”. This proposal was seconded by Cllr. Burke.

Following discussion, a request from Cllr. Killilea and Cllr. Burke to withdraw their proposal regarding Irish TV was unanimously agreed.

Cllr. Healy proposed that ‘Galway County Council undertake an internal study on delayed online audio streaming and that the results be presented to the Corporate Policy Group for consideration and reporting to the main Council meeting thereafter.” This proposal was seconded by Cllr. K. McHugh.

It was was agreed that Cllr. Healy’s Motion be taken.

The motion as proposed by Cllr. Healy, seconded by Cllr. K. McHugh was agreed.

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 16 – CLLR. JIM CUDDY 2143

Cllr. Cuddy made the following proposal “that the functions of the National Parks and Wildlife services be transferred to the Local Authorities nationwide and that the National Parks and Wildlife Services be abolished forthwith. When this motion is passed I am asking that the relevant Ministers be notified without delay. This proposal was seconded by Cllr. Welby, and agreed.

Cllr. McHugh expressed the view that the Council did not have the power to implement this proposal.

29

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

Cllr. McClearn said that he was aware that there have been changes in personnel in the National Parks & Wildlife Service (NPWS) and he said he had no issue regarding Cllr. Cuddy’s proposal.

Cllr. Healy said that the delay in progressing the improvement works to the N59 Road is an example of the interference of the NPWS as regards development in Conamara. He said the N59 is being repaired constantly but the NPWS continues to prevent the Council from carrying out major road improvement works to this route.

Comh. Ó Curraoin expressed the view that a large number of wildlife had perished during the recent flooding, some of which occurred because of rules introduced by the NPWS preventing flood alleviation works being carried out.

Comh. Ó Cualáin said that while the Members are in favour of nature and conservation, the NPWS goes to extremes in this regard and when their intervention prevents the progress of vital infrastructure, the Members must stand up against the NPWS.

Cllr. Fahy said that the Council should send a strong message to the NPWS that they should not interfere with necessary drainage of channels around the county which would alleviate flooding of lands and houses.

Cllr. Welby expressed the view that people must be allowed to co-exist with the environment.

Cllr. M. Connolly said that certain property has been sterilized because of the Habitats Directive and this Directive should be revisited.

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 20 – COMH. SEOSAMH Ó CUALÁIN 2144

Comh. Ó Cualain referenced the written response received in reply to his Notice of Motion as follows: “The Council does not currently provide Demountable dwellings to meet the housing need of persons on our housing list. In individual cases we do replace Demountable dwellings that have deteriorated beyond serviceable use with unused or vacated DDs in better condition. However the Housing Section would be reluctant to be bound to never use them again in future as there may be a compelling reason for using them on an individual case basis.“

Comh. Ó Cualain made the following proposal “that the practice of providing demountable type dwellings as Social Housing be discontinued and that those who are currently in occupation of same be prioritized when suitable housing becomes available”. This proposal was seconded by Comh. Ó Curraoin.

Followinga brief discussion, a request from Comh. Ó Cualain and Comh. Ó Curraoin to withdraw their Motion on the basis that the matter would be referred to the Housing SPC for discussion, was unanimously agreed.

30

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 17 – CLLR. JIM CUDDY 2145

The following reply was given:-

“This Notice of Motion was not considered by the Members at the January meeting of Plenary Council.”

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 18 – CLLR. JIM CUDDY 2146

The following reply was given:-

“In relation to road works, councilors are fully briefed on the programme of works before we proceed. In relation to the larger designed projects we have and will continue to engage with the democratic process.”

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 19 – CLLR. MICHAEL FAHY 2147

The following reply was given:-

“Enurement Clauses cannot be removed from Planning permissions as they are a condition of Planning. The Grant of Permission is a legal document and all conditions must be complied with. Applications for removal of enurements are considered by the Planning Department on a case by case basis.”

CHRIOCHNAIGH AN CRUINNIÚ ANSIN.

31

Minutes of Monthly Meeting held on 25th January 2016

32