Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Municipal Offices

Contact: Rosalind Reeves, Democratic Services Manager 

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillors Clucas, Lansley, McCloskey and Walklett.

2.

Declarations of Interest

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

3.

Minutes of the last meeting pdf icon PDF 63 KB

11 May 2015

Minutes:

The minutes of the last meeting were signed and approved as a correct record.

4.

Communications by the Mayor

Minutes:

The Mayor informed the meeting that Councillor Walklett was currently in hospital and wished him a speedy recovery.

 

The Mayor highlighted the events he had attended since he had taken up office and said what a great privilege it was to meet people in the community and witness the valuable work that was undertaken.

 

The Mayor then thanked those Councillors who had been present that morning at the start of Armed Forces Week where the flag had been raised.

He informed Members of the Civic Service which would take place at the Cheltenham Minster on Saturday 15 August at 1 pm to mark VJ day. He also informed Members of the British Legion event for VJ day which would be held on 16 August.  Cheltenham would be welcoming the Princess Royal on 7 July and on 12 July the Mayoress and the local MP would be undertaking a skydive in aid of the Mayor’s charities. At the end of July Gottingen would be hosting visitors from Cheltenham.


Finally the Mayor reminded Members to come appropriately dressed for Council out of respect for the roles of all Councillors, the Mace and the Queen and the citizens who they were elected to represent.

5.

Communications by the Leader of the Council

Minutes:

The Leader thanked the Mayor for his best wishes to Councillor Walklett who he hoped would be home from hospital shortly.

 

The Leader informed Members that Councillor Barnes would be replaced by Councillor McCloskey on Licensing committee. Councillor Barnes would take up the position of substitute on this committee.

 

Members were reminded that a member seminar on devolution would be held in conjunction with Tewkesbury Borough Council on 30 June at 2.30pm in Cheltenham or 5 pm in Tewkesbury.

 

Members were also reminded that the non-statutory consultation on the Cheltenham Plan –issues and options had been launched that day and would be open until 3 August. The Cheltenham Plan sat alongside the JCS.

6.

Public Questions pdf icon PDF 52 KB

These must be received no later than 12 noon on the fourth working day before the date of the meeting

Minutes:

1.

Question from Ken Pollock to the Cabinet Member Finance, Councillor John Rawson

 

At 10 am today, Tuesday 16th June, the promised 'Report of the Cabinet Member Finance' has still not been published for the 'Accommodation Strategy' item, neither for Cabinet at 6pm today, nor for Full Council next Monday.  The item is not marked 'Exempt'.

As the Finance Member's report has not appeared, it is clearly no longer possible to write a Public Question for that Item by noon today.

 

Both Cabinet and Full Council decisions are marked a 'Key'. 

Accordingly, how can any Decision properly be made when not only are "28 days" prior publication of any details not being provided but no notification period ?

 

Response from Cabinet Member

 

I am sorry if the inclusion of the Accommodation Strategy on the Cabinet and Council agendas caused Mr Pollock some confusion. It was done several weeks ago in case either Cabinet or Council needed to take further decisions in respect of the property acquisition agreed on 14 April. 

 

Since the last Council meeting a great deal of work has been done, not only to progress the acquisition, but also to carry out due diligence in the Council’s interests. That has included seeking further independent specialist advice about the valuation and whether the acquisition is financially prudent in the market context. This work, which was continuing up to the middle of June, might have thrown up issues that needed to be brought to Members for consideration. On the contrary, however, the outcome has been to reassure me and officers that the decisions made on 14 April were sound. For that reason, the need for further decisions does not arise and I asked that the agenda items be withdrawn. Therefore, no further report has been prepared or published on the matter.

 

 

7.

Member Questions pdf icon PDF 50 KB

Minutes:

1.

Question from Councillor Tim Harman to Cabinet Member Development and Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

 

Can I welcome the recent leaflet raising awareness with regard to action to reduce the problems that residents have with Urban Gulls.

Can I ask if the Cabinet Member is aware of the experiment being carried out by Gloucester City Council and others using a Bird of Prey as a further deterrent. Would he look at this option and see if he would help the situation on Cheltenham?

 

Response from Cabinet Member

 

Yes we are aware the Contractors for Glos City did for the first time present a bird of prey during their gull control program this year. The theory being that the presence of the raptor re-enforces a message to the gulls that it is not a good place to nest.

The use of birds of prey is a more commonly utilized gull control method in open/rural areas such as landfill sites.  However, given the additional costs of this method along with the practicalities of their use in urban areas it has yet to be validated as a value for money exercise.  

In Cheltenham we did this year trial egg replacement as opposed to the egg oiling method of previous years.  As a member of the Severn Estuary Gull Group we receive feedback from other LAs on the 2015 program, this includes Gloucester who will report on any additional benefits of their use of a bird of prey.

I can confirm that all available methods and previous outcomes are considered during our annual review of the gull control program here in Cheltenham. 

 

In a supplementary question, Councillor Harman asked if there could be report back to Council on the outcome of the trial in Gloucester City.

 

The Cabinet Member acknowledged that the management of seagulls was an important issue for the town and therefore it was important to explore every option and understand the full implications of any proposed solution and how it could be implemented.  He looked forward to hearing back from Gloucester City and would keep Members informed of the results.

 

2.

Question from Councillor Andrew Chard to Cabinet Member Clean and Green Environment, Councillor Chris Coleman

 

Could the Cabinet Member please tell me what facilities there are for disabled children to play in the Borough’s parks and play areas?”

 

Response from Cabinet Member

 

Cheltenham Borough Council’s adopted Greenspace Strategy includes the 10 principles to play design contained within the Play England document ‘Design for play; A guide to creating successful play spaces’.

 

The following paragraphs from that document are reflected in our approach to play provision:

 

‘Successful play spaces offer enjoyable play experience to disabled children and young people, and to those who are non-disabled, whilst accepting that not all elements of the play space can be accessible to everyone. Children with different abilities can play together in well-designed play spaces, and parents and carers who are themselves disabled should be able to gain access to play  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.

Petition for CCTV provision in Cheltenham pdf icon PDF 486 KB

Report of the Cabinet Member Development and Safety

Minutes:

The Mayor referred Members to the process for dealing with petitions as laid down in Appendix 2 and then invited the petitioner, Mr Zach Bromfield to address Council.

                                   

Mr Bromfield firstly addressed the issues that were inherent in the petition taking shape. He explained that he had incorrectly assumed that an attack on a teenage girl in Brunswick Street, which had prompted him to start the petition, had taken place on 2nd May this year but it had actually taken place last year. He then explained that he had chosen to start this petition on Change.org instead of the council’s website because he felt that he would reach more people, including families outside of Cheltenham concerned for relatives or friends living in the community and therefore believed this would improve the petition’s chances of success. He also stated that the information used for this petition was solely from the Gloucestershire Echo. However, he had subsequently received information from the Police that the incidents of crime in these areas differed to what was mentioned in the petition. He provided members with the details of these incidences. Crime had been reduced overall thanks to the actions of Streetwatch and other actions taken by the community to assist crime-prevention. Mr Bromfield said that having consulted with council officers and Streetwatch he recognised that in a time of austerity, prioritisation was inevitable and therefore he intended to focus on Brunswick Street as the main area to have CCTV placed. He felt that it was wrong that residents living in St Paul’s should feel anxious about crime in their area and that he had not intended to give places he had mentioned a bad representation as an unsafe place to be nor damage the University’s reputation.

 

He explained that he had started this petition because of recent concerns he had developed over the security measures placed in certain areas of Cheltenham. Brunswick Street in particular had, according to fellow students, gained a bad reputation as an unsafe street to walk down at night. He had learned via the Gloucestershire Echo that there were other areas vulnerable to violent crime and in some of their interviews, there were several concerns raised over the choice to implement CCTV in these areas as a way to deter or assist the police in tackling violent crime.

 

Mr Bromfield believed that CCTV placed in Cheltenham, or at least Brunswick Street, would be a good idea, for several reasons as supported by Streetwatch:

·         CCTV would help deter criminals and also ensure their detection. The Brunswick Street area next to Matalan is considered a desolate spot, lacking overlooking residential windows and therefore a lack of witnesses.

·         CCTV can also be used therefore to disprove alibis criminals will use, for example that they say they went down one alleyway when the footage can show that they went down a different way. 

·         CCTV would make people feel more secure when walking down certain areas of Cheltenham at night.

·         It would be an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Section 151 Officer Interim arrangements pdf icon PDF 174 KB

Report of the Cabinet Member Finance

Minutes:

The Cabinet Member Finance introduced the report and explained that this was in response to a request from the Director Resources to release capacity in order to deliver on key corporate projects such as the Accommodation Strategy, Vision 2020 partnership and the Asset Management Plan. In the interim it was proposed that the role of S151 Officer be taken up by the Deputy Section 151 Officer via a secondment for a period of 18 months. It was noted that the Deputy Section 151 Officer held the position of S151 Officer at Forest of Dean District Council.

 

When asked what the financial implications were for these interim arrangements, the Cabinet Member reported that GO Shared Services have costed the implications of the proposal at £30k per annum. This was due to the reallocation of responsibilities within the Finance team. This cost could be met from the Transformation Challenge Award (TCA) paid to the 2020 vision partners.

 

In response to a question the Cabinet Member Finance clarified that the S151 officer was a member of the Senior Management Team and the Executive Board and the existing Director would continue to attend them.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the Deputy Section 151 Officer be designated, in an interim seconded capacity for 18 months, to the role of Section 151 Officer until further notice.

 

10.

Accommodation Strategy

THIS ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN AS NO DECISION IS REQUIRED AT THIS STAGE

Minutes:

This item had been withdrawn from the agenda.

11.

Notices of Motion

Minutes:

None received.

12.

To receive petitions

Minutes:

None received.

13.

Any other item the Mayor determines as urgent and which requires a decision

Minutes:

None.