Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Barnes, Davies, Henderson, Joy, Pemberton, Sankey, Smith and Tooke.

On behalf of the Council, the Mayor sent sympathy to Councillor Smith, following his recent bereavement.

The Mayor declared an interest in Agenda item 10, having been involved in the process from the start.  He said he would withdraw during the debate.

Councillor Beale also declared an interest in Agenda item 10, as a Member of the parish council.

Minutes of the Extraordinary meeting held on 4 June 2026.

The minutes of the extraordinary meeting held on 04 June were approved without amendments, and signed by the Mayor as a true record.

The Mayor reported on a full first month in office, having attended more than 12 events, including meetings with Cheltenham Housing Aid Centre, the Samaritans and the Ukrainian Business Forum, and celebrations of D-Day and the launch of the Heritage Action Plan and map, a great initiative which celebrates Cheltenham’s history and heritage. The Cheltenham Education Partnership event on climate change was a fantastic collaboration with schools from all sectors, and a fashion show at the University of Gloucestershire a stunning showcase of talented young people  He also attended degree shows and prize-givings, and the U3A Open Day.

The Leader shared the following updates:

-       OneLegal has been highly commended in the ‘Excellence in Training’ category for lawyers in local government; it is good to be acknowledged nationally and publicly, and a credit to the investment of the legal team, led by Shahzia Daya, in ‘growing our own’;

-       it is exciting to have reached an important milestone in the Golden Valley journey, with all primary conditions met and work ready to commence in July.  Huge thanks to all the officers and Members involved;

-       a recent networking event at the MX brought many businesses and charities together under the Golden Valley Social Value Charter, with over 100 participants making valuable connections to help drive this forward.  Thanks to Jack at HBD and Amy from CBC for pulling this together;

-       Members were briefed at the last Council meeting on the government’s decision on the statutory change order and its invitation to councils to submit their thoughts by 16 July.  The seven Gloucestershire councils have collated their thoughts in one document, which is being shared with Members (attached);  all responses reflect a consistent preference for a clear, collaborative and streamlined approach to LGR across the county.  Summarising the response, she said that CBC supports:

-     in the case of a single unitary, the creation of a new council operating through the joint committee model rather than a preparing council and implementation executive, with balanced representation between the county and district/ borough/city councils and clear leadership arrangements;

-     a single implementation team, led by the county council chief executive, alongside aligned election arrangements and a single returning officer at county level;

-     across all the options, including two-unitary models, joint committee structures and consistent governance, principles and practical arrangements that ensure smooth transition, clarity of leadership and strong local representation;

-      measures to preserve Cheltenham’s civic identity, including the use of charter trustees where necessary and a clear, county-wide approach to naming and electoral alignment.

She concluded saying that her overall preference is for a pragmatic and collaborative model that balances county leadership with meaningful district/borough/city involvement, to ensure stability and effective governance throughout that transition period. She said whatever the government does, CBC will continue to serve the people of Cheltenham first.

There were none.

These must be received no later than 12 noon on Thursday, 11 June 2026

The following public question and response were taken as read:

Question from Emma Nelson to Cabinet Member for Housing and Customer Services, Councillor Flo Clucas

I see there now a Security Guard at the main entrance to the Municipal Offices. Why is this now deemed necessary, when was the change made, and what is the total annual cost to CBC for provision of this service?

Cabinet Member response

A security officer has been introduced in response to verbal and physically aggressive incidents in the public areas of the Municipal Offices, often targeted at staff. The frequency of incidents of this nature has increased over a period of time and notably so over the past six months. The presence of a security officer is intended to support the wellbeing of both colleagues and members of the public who work in and visit the offices.

This is a temporary six-month trial which commenced on 11 May 2026 and is part of a wider programme of improvements to enhance safety in the building. The cost will be a maximum of £23,000

These must be received no later than 12 noon on Thursday, 11 June 2026.

One Member question had been received, with the response provided as follows:

Question from Councillor Chris Day to Cabinet Member for Planning and Building Control, Councillor Paul Baker

The Planning Protocol which was in place prior to the updated Protocol approved by the Council on 18 May says: “A schedule of all requests [for referral to the Planning Committee], together with the reasons as to whether they [sic] why they were accepted or declined will be maintained by the Head of Planning”

Could the Cabinet Member please supply a list of ward councillor requests for a Planning Committee decision that have been declined over the last three years. I would be grateful if the list would identify the planning application reference, and whether the request was declined because (a) it was received outside of the 21 day time limit, (b) did not contain valid planning reasons or (c) for other reasons.

I would also be grateful if the date range covered by the response could be identified.

Cabinet Member response:

The following table relates to the time-period 01 April 2023 – to date.

Councillor Day thanked the Cabinet Member for Planning and Building Control for his response. He did not have a supplementary question.

Report of the Leader

The Leader presented the report as published, saying it was the job of local authorities to administer the licensing regime in accordance with the law, taking no moral stand and recognising that sex establishments are a legitimate part of the retail and leisure industries. Licensing and regulation of SEVs is the preferred approach, minimising public protection and public safety risks.  She said the licensing committee undertook informal engagement sessions with a wide range of key stakeholders before commencing the formal policy review,  with outcomes from these sessions fully considered and some of them incorporated in the policy proposals.  Proposed changes, and those rejected, are set out with full reasons in the report. A working group was set up in late 2025, and a short consultation on two further amendments (the designated permitted area (DPA) and changes to the list of relevant considerations for licensed premises) has been run; these have subsequently been included in the policy, with reasons set out in the report. 

She said this is a sensitive subject and the council is fully committed to protecting residents and visitors, adding that it is heartening to see that the government has now committed to building a safer society for women and girls.

There were no Member questions.

In debate, Members welcomed the public consultation and introduction of the strongest, safest policy that the council can take forward at this time.  They made following comments:

-       thanks to the Leader, Cabinet, and licensing officers for the huge amount of time spent on this, and the former Chair of Licensing Committee for his proactive approach;

-       Cheltenham is a proud festival town, and with the requirements for SEVs driven by visitors and operators coming to the town specifically for this.  A nil approach would not be practical, but the proposed activity is limited to the town centre, away from residential areas;

-       the exemption allows operators to set up without a licence, as long as they don’t use the same venue more than once a month, for more than 24 hours in one session, or more than 11 times a year.  This is not ideal but is hopefully being prioritised under the government’s Violence against Women and Girls strategy, to ensure the safety of everyone, not just the performers; 

-       Cheltenham is rightly proud of its accredited Purple Flag area, which promotes a safe and welcoming town centre;

-       the new chair of Licensing Committee and the newly-appointed Cabinet Member for Safety and Communities are urged to continue work around the exemption rules.

The Cabinet Member for Safety and Communities thanked the Leader and Members for their comments and agreed with all the conclusions of this long and methodical process, which protect performers’ welfare, ensure premises are properly inspected, and make sure operators are aware of their legal responsibilities, whilst maintaining good professional working relationships with CBC.

The Leader added thanks to Louis Krog and Michelle Bignell for all their hard work.

Members voted unanimously to approved the recommendations.

RESOLVED  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Planning and Building Control

Having declared an interest in this item, the Mayor handed the Chair to the Deputy Mayor. 

Introducing the report, the Cabinet Member for Planning and Building Control said that, on behalf of the parish council,  the Mayor has been a huge driver of this process, which started its journey in 2015.  The outcome is  testimony to the determination, focus and commitment of everyone involved – parish councillors, borough councillors and officers – and, as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework, will allow the community to play a greater part in the planning process, focussing on its priorities and ensuring its local character is preserved. He noted the high level of public approval, which demonstrates the strong connection between the community and the parish council, and was delighted to propose that the neighbourhood plan be adopted.

There were no questions.

In debate, Members welcomed the report and made the following comments:

-       the Neighbourhood Plan has been ten years in the making and involved many people, with thousands taking part in the consultations.  The community’s aspirations, together with its character and heritage, will now have to be taken into account in planning decisions; this is a great result;

-       this experience and outcome should be used as a model going forward to other areas of the town with similar aspirations;

-       from a climate and environmental point of view, this is a great result and will make a positive difference.  It shows that the parish council takes environmental issues seriously, and it will help with CBC’s mission going forward;

-       this is an enormous and outstanding achievement – congratulations to all in Leckhampton with Warden Hill parish – but anywhere in Cheltenham can do the same, not just parished areas.  A neighbourhood forum needs to be created first, which can be a challenge, but hopefully this success will make it a little bit easier going forward.

The Cabinet Member for Planning and Building Control thanked Members for their positive comments, and added that another key positive is that the neighbourhood share of CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy) receipts increase from 15 to 25% with the neighbourhood plan in place – a significant benefit for the community.   

RESOLVED THAT:

a)        Council approves the request to ‘make’ the Leckhampton with Warden Hill Neighbourhood Plan at Appendix 3, as part of Cheltenham Borough Council statutory Development Plan following the outcome of the positive referendum result;

b)        authority is delegated to the Director of Planning and Building Control, in agreement with the Qualifying Body (Parish Council), to correct any minor errors such as spelling, grammar, typographical formatting, and clarify policy mapping that do not materially affect the substantive content of the Plan;

c)        authority is delegated to the Director of Planning and Building Control, to prepare the decision statement for publication.

Unanimous

Returning to the chair, the Mayor thanked Members for their support, saying the last eight years have been an amazing exercise and great learning process for him, helping to create the first  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

There were no motions.

There were none.

The Council is recommended to approve the following resolution:-

“That in accordance with Section 100A(4) Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting for the remaining agenda items as it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, if members of the public are present there will be disclosed to them exempt information as defined in paragraphs 3 and 5, Part (1) Schedule (12A) Local Government Act 1972, namely:

Paragraph 3: Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular

person (including the authority holding that information)

Paragraph 5: Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings

RESOLVED THAT:

-       in accordance with Section 100A(4) Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the remaining agenda items as it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, if members of the public are present there will be disclosed to them exempt information as defined in paragraphs 3 and 5, Part (1) Schedule (12A) Local Government Act 1972, namely:

Paragraph 3: Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

Paragraph 5: Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings

Exempt minutes of the Extraordinary meeting held on 4 June 2026

The exempt minutes of the meeting held on 04 June were approved and signed as a true record.