Agenda and draft minutes

Before moving to the formal business of the meeting, the Deputy Mayor paid tribute to the Deputy Chief Executive, Paul Jones, a much-loved and respected colleague, who unexpectedly passed away last week.  He said Paul first worked for the council as anapprentice at the age of 16, and subsequently worked his way up to the role of Deputy Chief Executive, S151 Officer and Returning Officer.  In many ways, as finance director, he was the architect of the council’s financial stability, to the benefit of everyone in the town and the council, and there was no-one with as much good humour, warmth and humanity as him.  His loss has caused much shock and sadness, and deep sympathy is extended to his family and immediate colleagues in the council team. 

He confirmed that the Leader will add a special item to the next Council agenda to give everyone an opportunity to pay tribute to Paul. In the meantime, a Book of Condolence has been placed in the Cambray Room, and there will also be an online way to remember him.

He invited everyone present to stand for a Moment of Reflection.

Apologies were received from Councillors Beale, Chandler, Harvey, Joy, Tooke and Willingham.

The Deputy Mayor confirmed that being a county councillor does not count as a registerable interest for Agenda Item 11, Local Government Reorganisation.

Minutes of the meeting held on 13 October 2025

The minutes of the meeting held on 13 October were approved unanimously as a true record and signed accordingly.

The Deputy Mayor said he had attended several events recently and highlighted just a few:

-       the 170^th anniversary of Cheltenham YMCA – an extraordinary and moving event, celebrating this fantastic local organisation and the striking scale and breadth of all it does;

-       a great celebration of Diwali at Pate’s, featuring dance and cultural diversity;

-       last week, a climate conference in the Chamber, the first half of which emulated the COP event in Belem, focussing on how the nations of the world are reacting to the existential threat of the climate emergency.  He said our generation has not succeeded very well but input from schools and young people suggests that the next generation will do much better. It was a moving and powerful event, and included some very tough questioning. 

The Leader had two main items to share. 

She recently met with the trustees of the Lido, a voluntary organisation which is going from strength to strength, as demonstrated by:

-       a record summer season, with almost 300k visitors and 3,261 season tickets;

-       the very popular dog swim raised £23k;

-       the new car park has 143 public spaces, 27 bike rack spaces and eight EV chargers;

-       110 seasonal workers are employed, including the winter season.

She was proud that the council supported the solar car park, now completed at a cost of £1.2m; the Lido is now 65% self-sufficient, and excess energy is exported at 15p per kilowatt.

She has also attended the annual parish council get-together, which focussed on local government reorganisation and highlighted the nervousness and uncertainty about the implication of this for parish councils.  Liberal Democrats’ strong commitment is to bottom-up democracy, so it is important to engage with them.   The second stage of the community governance review was approved at the last Council meeting, and will need five full-on reviews before moving to Stage 2; public consultation will take place 05 January-27 March, the responses will be reviewed by the working group in April-May, and it is likely the final recommendations will be brought back to Council in June.  Depending on the results, a reorganisation order will be made, and she stressed the importance of Members getting as many people as possible to feed into the consultation to make it of value.

The Deputy Mayor, who was also present at the parish council meeting, said there was very strong appreciation of CBC’s consultative approach. 

There were no petitions.

Five questions had been asked by three members of the public, all of whom were present to ask supplementary questions.

1.     Question from Rich Newman to the Leader, Councillor Rowena Hay

What evidence can Cheltenham Borough Council provide to prove that their plan of partitioning our county is the desirable option among the population?

Cabinet Member response:

I’d like to thank Mr Newman for the question. Firstly, it is important to clarify that any proposals relating to LGR are not solely Cheltenham Borough Council’s. All councils have worked together to produce business cases for both a single county unitary and a two unitary option based on an East/West split. Gloucester City Council have developed their own business case for a ‘Greater Gloucester’ Council with another council covering the remainder of the county. Council will also be having a free vote on the LGR options to support Cabinet in making the final decision on which LGR option to support.

With specific regard to partitioning the county, it is important to remind Mr Newman that Gloucestershire is currently partitioned seven ways between six district councils and one county council. In addition, prior to the government white paper, there was a broad consensus among all political parties in Gloucestershire that the preference would be to remain as district and county authorities split seven ways.

I also note that you yourself have previously stood for election to Cheltenham Borough Council.  Despite the fact that you have not yet succeeded in being elected, I take from your own commitment to seeking public office in this town that you believe in the importance of having committed local politicians who can passionately represent their local areas. For me this goes to the heart of Local Government Reorganisation, I fundamentally believe that whatever shape local government takes in Gloucestershire, it is vital that our residents and businesses do not feel distant from the decisions that are made. On this basis, having two councils for Gloucestershire could help make the people we represent feel more connected to the decisions that are made.

Furthermore, bearing in mind that local government reorganisation will likely have an impact for the next 50 years or more, at this moment we must make a decision on what is the right size council to serve our residents.

On this point the District Councils Network recently completed some independently verified analysis which explored looking at the size and performance of unitary councils.

The full report can be found via the District Council website but the key findings were as follows:

1. There is little or no evidence to support a preference for large unitary councils and no evidence to support the 500k population level set out in government criteria.
2. The bulk of the data analysed shows a non-existent or faint relationship between a council’s population and its outcomes.
3. When there is an apparent correlation between population size and outcomes, it rarely favours larger councils.
4. The evidence gives no reason to assume that smaller unitary councils will be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

There were none.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Economic Development, Wellbeing, Culture and Public Realm, Councillor Izaac Tailford

The Cabinet Member for Economic Development, Culture, Wellbeing and Public Realm introduced the report, which needed Council approval before it could progress to government.  He said markets are an important and beneficial part of Cheltenham, promoting economic and social wellbeing, but licensing of markets is problematic due to Section 83 of the Cheltenham Trading Act 1882, which makes it an offence to hold a market on any street in the borough and therefore requires the licensing of every individual trader in order to operate.  This is not sustainable and generates a huge administrative burden and cost to traders and the council every year. 

To resolve this, the Council approved a resolution to repeal S83 in July 2023, and following consultation, a bill has been approved which requires final approval from Members before being deposited with Parliament.  Following its adoption, CBC will be granted the powers to set up and manage new markets, setting the days, hours and charges, and to regulate sales.  This much-simplified process, fully supported by the majority of respondents, will leave more time to create a tailored approach to better fit the town going forward, supporting businesses better and creating more harmony in the town centre.  The private bill must be deposited by November 2025 - otherwise it will have to wait until November 2026 – and he hoped Members would support the recommendations and allow the authority to move forward with these essential works.

There were no Member questions.  In debate, the following points were made:

-       markets and traders don’t often appear at licensing committee but handling individual licenses clearly creates a lot of work for officers who are dealing with alcohol licences, SEVs, taxis and more.  A licence for a whole market will make their lives a lot easier;

-       it seems bizarre to be discussing an 1882 Act of Parliament, which has created such a huge amount of  bureaucracy and now requires a bureaucratic process to withdraw it.  Everyone agrees that markets are an enormous and positive bonus for the town, and the repeal of this act will mean the council has more control over where they go.  This is a great opportunity to save on bureaucracy and manage markets going forward to the benefit of all;

-       this is a great idea, giving the town an opportunity to hold markets in different areas – a great bonus for the town’s economy;

-       this is just one efficiency brought about by the new Licensing and Public Protection Manager who is doing a great job, and has made excellent progress so far with her successful and professional application of licensing law.

RESOLVED THAT: 

1.     it is expedient to promote a Bill for effecting all or some of the purposes mentioned below and that such a bill be promoted accordingly by the authority.  The purposes are:

a.    Repealing section 83 of the Cheltenham Improvement Act 1852;

b.    Applying Part III of the Food Act 1984 to any market in the borough; and

c.    Introducing a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Report of the Leader, Councillor Rowena Hay

Introducing the report, the Leader said resident surveys have been undertaken in 2019, 2022, and 2025, with the results of this year’s survey now collated and presented to Members for noting and information.  She made the following points:

-       the surveys help measure how residents feel about Cheltenham and CBC services, and this year’s is particularly well timed, coinciding with local government reorganisation, to provide information about how people identify with the town and which services are most valued;

-       there is continued dissatisfaction with roads and pavements, and the findings will be shared with the new administration at the county, which will hopefully make improvements to benefit Cheltenham residents;

-       we have been through torrid times since the last survey, with covid, the cost of living crisis, inflation and massive increase in energy bills presenting a huge financial challenge and requiring the council  to deliver millions of pounds’ worth of savings to protect our services.  The fact that overall satisfaction levels this year are consistent with those of  2019 is something of which we can be proud, although there is always room for improvement;

-       many people responded to the survey on line, but to ensure qualitative data, a specific number of phone calls to residents were also made, to provide a proper cross section of all residents from the age of 16 to pensioners.

There may not be another survey before 2028 but we will look at what residents are telling us and fight to protect and enhance the local services they rely on. 

In response to Members’ questions, the Leader confirmed that:

-       where north, south, east and west Cheltenham is referred to, she was unable to say specifically which wards fall in these areas.  The survey was carried out by Enventure Research Ltd, and they can provide that information;

-       relevant results of the survey will be shared with Gloucestershire County Council – in particular residents’ concerns about roads and potholes, and the closure of the Swindon Road HRC – and she welcomed to opportunity to work together with the county to resolve the issues.

In debate, Members made the following points:

-       it is interesting to note that over 80% of Cheltenham residents think it is important to be represented by a local council and councillors;

-       another interesting point to note is that residents don’t feel they have enough choice of retail options in the town centre – this view is particularly prevalent with young people – and highlights the need to focus on attracting more affordable retailers to the town; 

-       although we all know we are lucky to live in Cheltenham, and the survey reinforces this, there are still challenges and it is important not to be complacent.  We must  continue to engage with residents, knock on doors, distribute leaflets, and make sure people know who we are and how to get in touch;

-       it is great to read in the survey that young people now think that Cheltenham is offering  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Report of the Leader, Councillor Rowena Hay

The Leader introduced the report, which she said had been an absolute Herculean effort over the past few months, to provide the information and detail requested by the government.  Although the borough does not welcome local government reorganisation, it is not in our control, and ironically the government will decide what shape local government in Gloucestershire will take, while badging the initiative as giving people greater powers.   She has fought for what she believes is the best option and in the best interests for Cheltenham’s residents and businesses, and tried to ensure that Cheltenham’s voice is heard. 

Whatever the outcome, the council will continue to work in a collaborative way and in partnership to deliver the best for our town, but working in collaboration requires compromise, so rather than try to highlight the key points of many hundreds of pages of business cases today, she would explain from the heart why her core liberal values make her believe that two unitaries – East and West Gloucestershire - is the best option for Cheltenham and the county:

-       business cases are not statements of fact – they are opinions, underpinned by financial assumptions, and the same data can be used as the basis of very different proposals;

-       there is no doubt that one big council can try to ensure that local residents’ forums and parish networks go some way towards mitigating the loss of local councils, but why take risk?  A fundamental Liberal belief is to always aim for the most power at lowest level and on this measure, two unitaries are the only choice for Gloucestershire;

-       the maths is simple – in a future East Gloucestershire Council, almost 50% of the councillors will represent Cheltenham; in a single unitary, it will be only 25% who are able to speak for our town.  This will result in a dilution of our power and influence – over Cheltenham’s culture, festivals, investment, sense of place – and cannot be supported;

-       we currently have an urban-centred, rural-blind government, hostile to town and parish councils,  which wants to reduce power to neighbourhood talking shops with no power to create change. This is a top-down, civil servant-led artificial construct,  based on population size and service delivery assumptions, trying to boil down the creation of new councils to some sort of technical procurement exercise. We have played our part and worked hard to make our case, but no civil servant can override our knowledge of our wards over the decades;

-       the current two-tier system has its faults, but recognises the diversity of place across the county, and can flex to the vast differences, delivering local politicians with the power to shape place.  Whatever option is chosen, the result will be a council many times bigger than what we have now, and faced with that choice, we must choose the smallest viable option to ensure that decision-making and power remain as close to residents as it can.

She ended by saying this is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

Delegation of Planning Enforcement to Tewkesbury Borough Council in respect of Golden Valley Development – Report of the Cabinet Member Planning & Building Control, Cllr Mike Collins

The Deputy Mayor had two items of urgent business.

The Cabinet Member for Planning and Building Control introduced this important late item, explaining the background and why a decision was urgently required, as set out in the report. He said the report is in line with Corporate Plan priorities, and drew Members’ attention to Paragraph 3.1, which outlines the responsibilities that will remain with CBC.  He hoped that they would be happy with this approach and the contents of the report.

In response to a Member question about a reciprocal arrangement with Tewkesbury Borough Council, the Cabinet Member for Planning and Building Control said that this arrangement relates specifically to the north and south parcels of land owned by CBC and the developers.

There were no other questions and no debate.

RESOLVED THAT:

1.               the delegation of planning enforcement powers to Tewkesbury Borough Council under Section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972 and Section 9D of the Local Government Act 2000 is approved;

2.               The Director of Planning & Building Control, in consultation with the Monitoring Officer, is authorised to finalise and enter into a formal delegation agreement with Tewkesbury Borough Council.

3.               The arrangement will be reviewed annually by the Director of Planning & Building Control in consultation with the Monitoring Officer and Cabinet Member for Planning & Building Control to ensure effectiveness and continued alignment with strategic planning and land management objectives.

Unanimous

The Monitoring Officer said the meeting had begun with a moment’s reflection on the very sad loss of our Deputy Chief Executive, Paul Jones and that one of his roles was that of Electoral Registration Officer and Returning Officer.  All will agree that he did an amazing job running CBC’s elections for many years, but now the council is due to publish the register of electors on 01 December and legally we must have an Electoral Registration Officer in place in order to be fully compliant with the Representation of the People Act.  Having taken advice today from the Electoral Commission about whether we can defer making appointment, it was made very clear that we should proceed to an urgent decision to appoint an Electoral Registration Officer and Returning Officer to be in place if an election was called. 

There has been no time to write a report, but the recommendation is that the Chief Executive, Gareth Edmundson, is appointed to those roles with immediate effect.

There were no questions or debate. 

RESOLVED THAT:

-       the Chief Executive, Gareth Edmundson, is appointed as Cheltenham Borough Council’s  Electoral Registration Officer and Returning Officer, with immediate effect.

Unanimous