Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber - The Guildhall. View directions

Contact: Dinah Lilley  01427 676595

Media

Items
No. Item

87.

Chairman's Welcome and Tributes to the late Alan Caine

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting and took the opportunity to pay tribute to past West Lindsey District Councillor, Alan Caine, who had passed away on 20 February 2017.  A minute’s silence had been held during the prayers prior to the commencement of the meeting.  A donation had been sent by the Council in lieu of flowers to MacMillan, and the Council’s flag was flying at half-mast.  Alan had served as a West Lindsey District Councillor from 1995 to 2015 and had held the position of Chairman from 1999 to 2001, and was also a prominent member of Caistor Town Council.

 

Several Members also spoke warmly of their memories of Alan and the sentiments of all were that he would be missed, by his colleagues on the Council and also by the town of Caistor – where he had been known as ‘Mr Caistor’ due to his commitment and the work he undertook.  Condolences were sent to his family.

88.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 136 KB

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 23 January 2017 were confirmed as a correct record.

89.

Members' Declarations of Interest

Members may make any declarations of interest at this point and may also make them at any point during the meeting.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

No declarations of interest were made at this point of the meeting.

90.

Matters Arising pdf icon PDF 237 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Monitoring Officer noted that all items were showing black as having been completed.

91.

Announcements

i)              Chairman of Council

ii)             Leader of the Council

iii)            Head of Paid Service

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Chairman

 

The Chairman noted that he had attended a number of engagements, which had been circulated to Members.  One particular highlight was a visit to a business in Saxilby, which had begun as a single individual who then moved into farm buildings to expand, and subsequently went on to employ over 100 people.  There were plans to expand further, and all this was over a period of just seven years.  This was a good example of a real success story.

 

The Chairman also noted the distribution of envelopes, containing surveys, in front of Members, requesting that they distribute these in their wards.  This was an important project, initiated by the Prosperous Communities Committee to establish the level of Broadband Provision across the district.  It was particularly important that the surveys were returned to the Council in order for the results to be collated and a clearer view of the area’s facilities obtained.

 

Leader of the Council

 

The Leader informed the Council of various meetings he had attended and speakers heard.  On 1 February Andrew Percy MP had confirmed that the Devolution process had ceased.  On 2 February the Leader had met with a number of MPs at the District Councils Network Conference.  Gavin Barwell had spoken regarding the Housing White Paper and emphasised the need to build for the future, and outlined plans for loans to developers and first time buyers.  Greg Clark, the Minister for Business, Energy and Industry had highlighted the need for infrastructure and spoken on the emerging Green Paper, urging a response to be made.  Sajid Javid, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government discussed greater integration with CCGs and to provide more support to Adult Social Care.  There was a £2.3b fund available from April, which it would be good to access, but would have been more accessible, had Devolution progressed.

 

There had also been a meeting with Lincolnshire Leaders at the Farming Forum, and Thonock and Somerby Estates had discussed the water course through Blyton which was to be modified.  The Trent meeting of the associated drainage authorities, where discussion took place on the Environment Agency’s intention to hand over responsibility for water courses to either local authorities or riparian owners.  This needed to be monitored as it was felt that Drainage Boards would be a better option.

 

The Leader had also attended the County Council’s meeting where the County Leader affirmed that opinions were to be sought from District Councils regarding the proposals for a unitary authority.

 

 

Head of Paid Service

 

The Chief Executive noted that the Leader had briefly mentioned the Devolution process, the Partnership working with the other authorities was clearly not at the same point as six months previously, and the Housing and Infrastructure Group was not meeting as regularly now as partners focus on other priorities and in absence of a Combined Authority for Greater Lincs and funding to it no longer being the driver.  The current situation was not clear and an update would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

92.

Public Question Time

Additional documents:

Minutes:

There were no questions from members of the public.

93.

Questions Pursuant to Council Procedure Rule No. 9

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillor Trevor Young queried that he had submitted a question to Council, however this had not been circulated.  Officers verified that this question had not been received, and undertook to investigate.  Meanwhile Councillor Young was requested to re-submit the question which would be considered for the following meeting.

94.

Motions Pursuant to Council Procedure Rule No. 10

Dear Members,

 

I am bringing this motion to you tonight after several instances where I have been let down by the planning department of West Lindsey District Council where there appears to be a disregard for the views of Ward Councillors.

 

If you recall, I have brought this matter up before, as misunderstandings between the Councillor role and the role of planning was evident - planning believing that their role is black and white and ALL judgments should be made on planning grounds alone. If this were the case then there would be no need whatsoever for a Planning Committee consisting of Members. It is now clear to me that this confusion still remains and decisions are being made without listening to the local democratic voice.  If you recall I received a public apology on this matter.

 

The last straw came for me recently when, despite at least 17 email interactions between myself and other objectors, Parish Councillors, Executive level officers and Planning Officers; a delegated decision was made. I was only informed after the event had completed. It did not go to committee as requested previously and I was not communicated with, despite several requests to be updated so that I could check whether the committee option had been taken. This was an application, virtually identical to others, which had been previously refused.

 

Unfortunately, this is not the first time this has happened to me and all Councillors should be concerned that decisions are being made on controversial applications without Members being able to present the local perspective to committee. We are all aware that this is the essential democratic counter measure to what may be inappropriate decisions.

 

I therefore move that in the forthcoming audit of development management the issue of how the planning department communicates with ward councillors is included within the scope of that audit and that the training given to officers around political awareness is reviewed and strengthened.

 

Meanwhile I await the outcome of an investigation regarding a separate complaint about how the processing of the application I referred to was handled.

 

Cllr Reg Shore

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillor Shore had submitted the following motion:

 

Dear Members,

 

I am bringing this motion to you tonight after several instances where I have been let down by the planning department of West Lindsey District Council where there appears to be a disregard for the views of Ward Councillors.

 

If you recall, I have brought this matter up before, as misunderstandings between the Councillor role and the role of planning was evident - planning believing that their role is black and white and ALL judgments should be made on planning grounds alone. If this were the case then there would be no need whatsoever for a Planning Committee consisting of Members. It is now clear to me that this confusion still remains and decisions are being made without listening to the local democratic voice.  If you recall I received a public apology on this matter.

 

The last straw came for me recently when, despite at least 17 email interactions between myself and other objectors, Parish Councillors, Executive level officers and Planning Officers; a delegated decision was made. I was only informed after the event had completed. It did not go to committee as requested previously and I was not communicated with, despite several requests to be updated so that I could check whether the committee option had been taken. This was an application, virtually identical to others, which had been previously refused.

 

Unfortunately, this is not the first time this has happened to me and all Councillors should be concerned that decisions are being made on controversial applications without Members being able to present the local perspective to committee. We are all aware that this is the essential democratic counter measure to what may be inappropriate decisions.

 

I therefore move that in the forthcoming audit of development management the issue of how the planning department communicates with ward councillors is included within the scope of that audit and that the training given to officers around political awareness is reviewed and strengthened.

 

Meanwhile I await the outcome of an investigation regarding a separate complaint about how the processing of the application I referred to was handled.

 

Cllr Reg Shore

 

 

Note: Councillor White joined the meeting at 19.38.

 

 

Councillor Giles McNeill, Chairman of the Governance and Audit Committee responded to the motion and set out the scope of the forthcoming audit to be undertaken by the Committee.  The scope was to include communications with the public and Councillors and invitations would be issued for interviews with Councillors from 2 May 2017.  The Chairman had met with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Planning Committee and the Chief Operating Officer.  The purpose of the audit was to undertake a full review of the efficiency and effectiveness of the planning and enforcement services.  Twenty audit days were being dedicated to the work, as there were different issues being experienced to those of two years ago.

 

Councillor McNeill then seconded the motion.

 

The Chief Executive then informed Members that whilst normal practice was to wait  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

95.

Corporate Plan (2016-2020) Action Plan Update pdf icon PDF 387 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The report detailed key strategic activity in progress in support of delivery of the objectives of the Corporate Plan (2016-2010), and the key achievements during 2016/17 in support of the Corporate Plan.  

 

The Council approved its Corporate Plan 2016-2020, at the Full Council meeting of 3March 2016.

 

The Corporate Plan presented the vision as being “West Lindsey to be seen as a place where people want to live, work, invest and visit” and identified future priorities and outcomes which were based on evidence of assessments, surveys and key statistics such as deprivation and health related matters.

 

The Corporate Plan also detailed values which guided the Council’ working:

 

·         Delivering a surplus to re-invest

·         Investing in communities

·         Delivering customer focussed priorities

·         Generating growth

 

and set out the approach based on the Entrepreneurial Model of:

 

·         Investing in communities to help themselves and others

·         A more commercial Council

·         A modern, innovative and collaborative Council

 

The Corporate Plan contained six themes with a number of priorities and desired outcomes associated with each theme:

 

1.    Open for Business

2.    People First

3.    Asset Management

4.    Central Lincolnshire Local Plan

5.    Partnerships/Devolution

6.    Excellent Value for Money Services

 

To ensure that the Corporate Plan remained a working document, a commitment was made to provide an annual update in relation to progress of key activity undertaken in support of the achievement of the Plan’s objectives.

 

Appendix One, attached to the report, provided Members with an overview of the key strategic work activity currently in progress against each of the Corporate Plan themes.

 

The Leader of the Council introduced the Corporate Plan document stating that it set out an ambitious vision both for the Council and the people of the district.  It was well understood that it was no longer possible to rely on the government as in the past.  Change and delivery for the electorate relied upon embracing of the commercial element of the Corporate Plan.  Customers and partners had to be prioritised within that Plan delivery at a realistic cost.  In noting that there were many key activities listed in the report, the Leader commended the report for approval.

 

Brief discussion ensued with Members complimenting the Plan on its visionary approach, however some Members felt that the proposals within it appeared too Gainsborough-centric, with insufficient focus on the smaller towns, villages and rural areas.  Other Members responded that the regeneration of Gainsborough and the encouragement of business growth would help to enhance the whole district.

 

The recommendation was seconded and on being voted upon it was RESOLVED that:

 

a)    the key activity detailed within the report to facilitate the delivery of the objectives of the Corporate Plan be supported;

b)    the activity set out be agreed as the basis for an external publication.

c)    the report be approved.

 

 

96.

Financial Strategy and Medium Term Financial Plan 2017/18 to 2021/22 pdf icon PDF 6 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Director of Resources presented the report for Members’ approval.

 

The paper had been presented to the Corporate Policy and Resources Committee on 9 February 2017 based on the provisional settlement announced on 15 December.  On 20 February the final settlement was announced with little change.  Therefore the document was as presented to Corporate Policy and Resources Committee.

 

NNDR settlement funding had now been finalised and was contained at paragraph 2.6.  The budgeted NNDR income was provided in Appendix A.

 

The budgeted net income was £2.266m after funding the previous year deficit of £1.060m.  The overall benefit continued to be £276k from the pool.  This would be updated for the budget book.

 

The Medium Term Financial Plan was the primary strategic financial document for the authority and set out the local and national context, and the revenue and capital plans for the next five years.

 

The document also met a number of regulatory requirements:-

i)              The requirement to agree a balanced budget for the coming year 2017/18;

ii)             The requirement to establish the level of Council Tax for 2017/18; and

iii)            Meet current best practice (supported by CIPFA) by setting the budget in a medium term time horizon.

 

Over the last four years West Lindsey had reduced expenditure by £4.4m reflecting the reduction in core spending power as calculated by central government.

 

The impact of the settlement included:-

i)              Reduction in Rural Services Grant (RSG) by a further £626k

ii)             Changes to New Homes Bonus reducing expected income by £371k

iii)            The settlement reflects the four year deal offered in February 2016 and therefore delivered the expected level of RSG.

 

The document had been restructured this year to incorporate the Council’s business plan commitment in section 3.  The financial implications of the settlement and the authority’s business plan commitments were reflected in section 4.  Members were then referred to paragraph 4.11.2 which set out the underlying assumptions of the MTFP.

 

On that basis, and with the savings reflected in paragraph 4.12 the Council was able to agree a balanced budget for 2017/18 and 2018/19 with a remaining deficit in year 2020/21 of over £400k.

 

The Council Tax position was set out for Members in paragraph 3.5.

 

The Medium Term Financial Plan set out an ambitious capital programme in Appendix E.  the programme totalled over £53m and was planned to be funded from reserves, capital receipts, borrowing and grants.

 

A risk analysis was included in Part 9 of the document.  As the authority took a commercial approach to its activities there were specific risks to be highlighted.  Firstly the assumption of commercial returns on the acquisition of investment properties. If it was not possible to find suitable acquisitions this could be an issue going forward.  Secondly the assumption of introduction of Green Waste Charging in 2018/19, which, if not introduced would need alternative strategies to deliver the budget indicated.

 

Finally, Members were reminded that earlier in the financial year the authority’s budget process had received a full assurance outcome from internal  ...  view the full minutes text for item 96.

97.

Exclusion of Public and Press

To resolve that under Section 100 (A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

RESOLVED that under Section 100 (A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

 

98.

Surestaff Business Plan 2017-18

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The report submitted for Members’ approval provided a business summary and an outline of the benefits delivered following the investment in Surestaff

 

The original proposal to buy Surestaff had been based on four potential benefits:

 

1 – To have a reliable local provider of agency staff to WLDC

2 – To minimise the cost of managing suppliers within the Operational establishment

3 – To generate an income stream from charged in services

4 – To generate a shareholder return

 

The report provided an update on current performance and had the full business plan for the next three years attached.

 

A recent reforecast, compiled on a relatively prudent basis, illustrated the potential for a positive contribution resulting from a local enterprise which was already generating a social return for the local communities of WLDC.

 

Clarification was sought on some of the processes involved and assurance was given that all due diligence was undertaken during the management of the business and there was an ethical focus on its activity.

 

On being moved, seconded and voted upon it was RESOLVED that, as the single shareholder, the Council agreed the Surestaff Business Plan attached to the report.

 

99.

Minutes of Committee Meetings pdf icon PDF 2 MB

To Receive the Minutes of Committee Meetings Published since the Council Meeting on 23 January 2017

Additional documents:

Minutes:

NOTE: The meeting resumed in open session for consideration of the following item.

 

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Committee Meetings published since the Council meeting of 14 November 2016 be received.