Agenda and minutes

The Chairman welcomed all Members to the meeting.

Welcomes were also extended to the Officers, Members of the Public and Press who were in attendance.

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting of Full Council held on 2 July 2018.

(a)       Minutes of Meeting held on 2 July 2018

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Meeting held on 2 July 2018 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

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

Councillor Stuart Kinch declared a personal non-pecuniary interest at this stage of the meeting, in respect of agenda item 6 – Receipt of a Petition Entitled “Save Gainsborough Town Centre”, as he owned a share of a business located within the Town Centre area.

Setting out current position of previously agreed actions as at 2 November 2018.

The Monitoring Officer noted that all items due for completion were showing black, as having been completed.

The two remaining green items, were not yet due for completion but were on track to be completed within their respective due dates.

RESOLVED that the Matters Arising be noted.

West Lindsey District Council was presented with a Petition on Monday 13 August 2018.

The Petition is entitled “Market Rasen Needs a Swimming Pool Not a Dry Leisure Facility” and contains over 2000 signatures.

The Petition goes on to state “West Lindsey District Council have secured a site on Gainsborough Road, between Market Rasen Primary School and the Limes Country Hotel, to build a dry leisure facility.  We the residents of Market Rasen hereby sign to say we are opposing these plans and want the land to be used to provide a much needed swimming pool which will benefit people of all ages and disabilities”.

This matter will be debated, in accordance with the agreed Petition Scheme.

“West Lindsey District Council was presented with a Petition on Monday 13 August 2018.

The Petition was entitled “Market Rasen Needs a Swimming Pool Not a Dry Leisure Facility” and contained over 2000 signatures.

The Petition went on to state “West Lindsey District Council have secured a site on Gainsborough Road, between Market Rasen Primary School and the Limes Country Hotel, to build a dry leisure facility.  We the residents of Market Rasen hereby sign to say we are opposing these plans and want the land to be used to provide a much needed swimming pool which will benefit people of all ages and disabilities”.

The Chairman advised that the matter would now be debated, in accordance with the agreed Petition Scheme and therefore she welcomed Lead Petitioner, June Clark to the meeting and invited her to make her five minute address to Members.

Mrs Clark made the following Statement to Council: -

“I am presenting this petition on behalf of the Market Rasen Action Group and the residents of Market Rasen and surrounding towns and villages. I am not representing Market Rasen Town Council in any capacity.

The petition was started when a press release in the Market Rasen Mail, from West Lindsey District Council, informed us that Market Rasen was to get a multi million pound dry leisure facility. Residents were understandably very upset that there had been no consultation about this new facility and the fact that there was no mention of a swimming pool.

As there had been no consultation, Market Rasen residents were not aware that the current facilities at the De Aston Centre would be closing. Although we agree that dry facilities are needed, a swimming pool is seen as a higher priority.

The Leader of West Lindsey District Council and one of its Officers attended a Market Rasen Town Council meeting. When answering questions from Market Rasen Action Group and the public, the Leader admitted that no consultation had been undertaken. We were told that we either accepted what was on offer, or we would lose the money all together. A wonderful demonstration of democracy in action.

Several years ago, extensive surveys and consultation took place and led to a proposal to build a swimming pool in Market Rasen. This was agreed in 2008 at a West Lindsey meeting. Political changes that followed, meant that the proposal was shelved.

The recent presentation of what Market Rasen is getting, showed no provision for a swimming pool, just a vague 'well, we could fit one in this space, if necessary'.

Market Rasen Action Group and the residents of Market Rasen would like answers to the following:

Why was no public consultation done on the new dry facility before the release of the plans?

How many people currently use the De Aston facilities?

If the premise centres on the fact that swimming pools lose money, why is Gainsborough' s kept open?

If the suggestion that sports facilities being managed across the District will result in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

West Lindsey District Council was presented with a Petition on 15 October 2018

The Petition is entitled “Save Gainsborough Town Centre” and contained over 1175 signatures at that date.

The Petition asks that: -

“the WLDC Conservative controlled Council to urgently improve the Town Centre”

This matter will be debated, in accordance with the agreed Petition Scheme.

West Lindsey District Council was presented with a Petition on 15 October 2018

The Petition was entitled “Save Gainsborough Town Centre” and contained over 1175 signatures at that date.

The Petition asked that: -

“the WLDC Conservative controlled Council to urgently improve the Town Centre”

The Chairman advised that the matter would now be debated, in accordance with the agreed Petition Scheme and therefore she welcomed Lead Petitioner, Councillor Trevor Young, to the meeting and invited him to make his five minute address to Members.

Councillor Young made the following Statement to Council: -

“The Liberal Democrat Group present this petition urgently requesting this council to improve the town centre, and to provide the necessary investment and resource to protect the existing businesses from further decline.

We call upon this council for this to be debated in this chamber this evening and an urgent paper to be prepared to the next relevant policy committee.

It is recognised that economic downturn in high street shopping is a national issue, however the Liberal Democrats firmly believe that in those towns where there is little effort to address the issue, they will suffer the worst.

•      Currently in the Gainsborough Town Centre there are 1 in 5 shops empty, more than any other town in Lincolnshire.

•      In the past year 13 businesses have been forced to close in the town centre, one every month?

•      There is a risk of more retail closures in the next six months.

•      The Gainsborough Market once recognised as one of the best in the county has almost disappeared.

•      Trinity Street – which is the main gateway into the town now has 1 in 3 shops empty, which is hardly a good advertisement for a town looking to achieve growth and external investment.

The Liberal Democrat Group also surveyed all the town centre businesses and retailers.

•      84% reported that this Council does not offer enough support / advice / information to their business

•      76 % of businesses stated that Customer Numbers have massively decreased over the past Year.

•      74% of businesses think that the decline in the town centre is having a negative impact on their weekly trade.

•      92% of businesses feel that the Closure of Oldrids Store in the Town Centre has had a detrimental impact on trade

•      96% of businesses feel that the council could offer far more daily / weekly assistance.

•      100% of businesses feel that far more could be done with the market square with short term car parking in the market square being the number one priority.

Whilst it is agreed that there are many challenges regarding Town Centres competing with online shopping etc – It is a Myth that all Town Centres are Dying!

Retford, Newark, Worksop, Brigg and Boston all have vibrant town centres and markets, so what are they doing different to Gainsborough.

This council has a reputation of taking far too long to address issues, we have  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

i)             Chairman of Council

ii)            Leader of the Council

iii)           Head of Paid Service

Chairman

The Chairman addressed Council advising it had been a very busy, but enjoyable period, with the up and coming weeks leading into Christmas looking even busier.

Over recent months she had had the pleasure of attending a number of Events, Award Ceremonies, Business visits and Official openings, making note of the following: -

*        attendance at three Graduation Ceremonies, in July it was Riseholme College of Further Education Awards in the Epic Centre, In September, the University of Lincoln’s International Business School ceremony and the Lincoln College Graduation both held at the Cathedral. It had been a great pleasure to see these hard working young people receive a whole variety of qualifications in their chosen fields and not all academic.

*        attendance at the Family Fun Day at the Trinity Arts centre in July, joined by fellow Members, for an action packed day organised in partnership with Lincolnshire County Council. It had been a fabulous day that had really brought the Community together, which the Chairman hoped to see become an annual event.

*        ‘turf cutting’ at two new Lace Housing developments, one at Ingham and the other at Nettleham.  Lace was a ‘not for profit’ company and their schemes were designed to enable older people to remain within their communities and maintain links with family and friends, enjoying quality facilities and services, the developments were making a welcome addition to the housing across our District.

*        There had been exciting times in Gainsborough with the opening of the fully refurbished Everyone Active Leisure Centre with Olympic medallist Colin Jackson in September and just this month the eagerly anticipated brand new Travelodge. The Chairman had had the pleasure of being part of the opening of both these establishments which demonstrated the Council’s commitment to continuous investment in the area.

*        The Chairman was keen to engage with Businesses and indicated she had a planned programme of visits in order to learn more about the enterprises that she considered to be the life blood of the District.  During the period she had joined the Leader for a visit to the Riverside Enterprise Park in Saxilby, touring two businesses and hearing how the Council’s development had helped business to establish and grow.  She had also visited a micro-Brewery, near Fiskerton, awarded funding through the Lindsey Action Zone, to expand in order to meet demand.

The Chairman had also hosted a number of events herself here at the Guildhall including a Flag Raising Event for Merchant Navy Day, for which she expressed thanks to those Councillors who had attended and a Bake off Style fundraising event to help raise funds for the Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.

The Chairman had also had the pleasure of hosting her annual Civic Service in her local church, St Peter’s in the village of Scotter in September.  She thanked her Chaplain the Reverend Swannack for his poignant service, those Councillors who had attended to support her and the Eau Valley Singers who performed both during  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

The Monitoring Officer advised the meeting that three questions had been received under the Public Question Time Scheme from Mr Peter Morley, who was in attendance to put his questions direct to the meeting.

The Chairman welcomed Mr Morley to the meeting, and invited him to put his three questions to the meeting.

Mr Morley’s questions were as follows: -

“Question 1

On the 19^th June the Finance Officer presented the Financial Statement to the Governance and Audit Committee for approval prior to external audit. He said “The first 23 pages are a narrative report, I ask you to read it and tell us if it works what we are trying to say with the narrative report is, this is all you need to read because we are conscious of the fact that not everybody wants to go through all the numbers and statements etc. and so we are trying to get to a succinct document that says this is what West Lindsey is all about.  He then goes on to say “Over the year we have made a small surplus on service of £150.000 and along with additional Business rates we ended with a surplus of £432.000. This surplus was in fact against a projected Budget set at the beginning of the year for part of the annual outgoings and is in actuality nothing more than a paper exercise.

In actual fact, overall for the year, income was £44.113m and expenditure was £45.701m which means there was a deficit of £1.588m, yet again in the Narrative report, the Finance Officer proudly proclaims “We have once again shown good financial stewardship and delivered a small profit”

At best this is misrepresentation of the facts and I ask that this Council provide a suitable explanation.

Question 2

Councillor Summers, in his introduction to the Financial Statement explained about the changes at senior level and how cost savings had been made but I will now ask him in light of these assumed savings why has the overall figure on the ‘Employee, Benefits, Expenses bill risen by £1.1M when equivalent full time staff numbers have reduced by 16 from the previous year.

Question 3

Again this is a question for Councillor Summers to answer, can you please explain the following; published figures in the narrative report state that in 2016/17 the Council had £18.88m of investments but at the end of 2017/18 this figure is now £15.316m and as almost £2.5m was spent on the Keighley Hotel this year it appears that almost £6m has disappeared from the Investment portfolio. I have further questions that require answers but will hold these over to the next meeting.”

The Chairman thanked Mr Morley for his questions and asked the Leader of the Council to respond.

As the first question made reference to the Executive Director of Resources, at the request of the Leader, he responded to Mr Morley’s first question as follows: -

“The table on page 15 shows the net  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

Councillor Trevor Young had submitted the following question, under Council Procedure Rule No. 9 to the meeting: -

1)        Question to Cllr Jeff Summers, Leader of the Council, from Councillor Trevor Young

“Could the Leader of the Council explain to the people of the District why it is that this council has not met for one full quarter of the year? By doing so he will also explain to the councillors why this is the case and why it seems un-important for the council to meet in a timely manner and take council for the affairs and wellbeing of the District and its citizens?

It is accepted that there are no meetings in August as has long been the case except for the planning committee. But a glance at the Council meeting calendar shows that at least one Full Council was cancelled, supposedly for lack of business and there has been no Full Council Meeting in October.

Could it be that the Leader and his administration are just tardy when it comes to meetings thinking that they have a majority and so debate and consideration don’t matter anymore?

Or perhaps the Leader and his administration are frightened of that very debate and questions that might arise either as direct questions or through the movement of business through the council.

While we accept there is no point in meeting for meeting sake the electorate who vote for us and pay our allowances surely have a right to expect the council to meet as a full council on a regular basis and to debate the policy which the administration want to enact during their tenure of office.

Time was when the council will deal with all business and its right that some business is enacted through committees.

However, there are times when a policy or change affects the whole district and thus every elected member and the people they serve. This can be seen in the move to charge for green waste for example or the letting of contracts for leisure services provision across the district.

The Market Provision is being discussed and worked through and the way markets are provisioned. This is causing some disquiet among the Leaders own members and it could be that bringing these policies and strategies to full council will show the cracks in the administration and allow the people to see where the current control of the council is failing the people who ought to expect more.

I invite the Leader therefore to answer the question and respond where in doing so hope that this council will not have a further period of one quarter of a year when it fails to meet.”

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Jeff Summers, responded as follows: -

“Thank you for your question Councillor Young.

You are correct to say that September’s scheduled full council was cancelled. It was cancelled by the Head of Paid service as there was insufficient business to be conducted to warrant a meeting. This  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

No Motions have been received for this meeting

The Chairman advised the meeting that no Motions, under Council Procedure Rule No.10, had been received.

The Council’s Vision, Mission and Values have been under review since the start of 2018. The review had included full engagement with staff and Members through a variety of techniques.

Members therefore gave consideration to a report which set out the review process which had been undertaken and the arising revised vision and set of values which it was being proposed be adopted by the Council.  It was also noted that the strap line “the Entrepreneurial Council” would be removed, in a phased approach.

Members noted that consideration of a revised mission for the Council would take place once the vision had been adopted and as part of the 2019/22 revised Corporate Plan.

In response to comments the Head of Paid Service outlined the reasons for removing the strapline emphasising the importance of a clear vision, understood by all.

Members were supportive of its removal citing a number of reasons for such and whilst it may have been appropriate at its time of adoption the Council had moved on.

Members considered it important that the values once adopted needed to filter into the culture and behaviour of the organisation.

In response to a suggestion that the wording of the vision should be left with some flexibility, the Head of Paid Service expressed caution to do so. The vision had been developed with staff and members and was considered to represent the essence of all the work which had been undertaken and was in accordance with the comments which had been made throughout.

RESOLVED that

(a)     the following vision for the Council, be endorsed and adopted:

          “WEST LINDSEY IS A GREAT PLACE TO BE WHERE PEOPLE, BUSINESSES AND COMMUNITIES THRIVE AND CAN REACH THEIR POTENTIAL”;

(b)     the following revisions to the Council’s values be endorsed and adopted

1.        To put the customer at the centre of everything we do

2.        To act as one council

3.        To be business smart, to act on evidence and take advantage of opportunities, thinking creatively and getting things done

4.        To communicate effectively with all stakeholders

5.        To have integrity in everything we do; and

(c)     the strapline “The Entrepreneurial Council” no longer be used.

The Chairman of the Licensing Committee outlined the report and recommended it for Council approval.

The review of the Gambling Policy was a ‘business as usual’ process for the licensing team, and in essence the team had to follow a statutory process in carrying out any ‘review’ of policy. 

Therefore the licensing authority was legally obliged to:

• Prepare
• Consult
• Determine, and
• Publish its Statement of Principles (Policy) every three years or sooner if necessary

This was a mandatory requirement as set out in Section 349 of the Gambling Act 2005.

A review of the policy had taken place and the persons and bodies consulted was kept deliberately wide in order for a comprehensive consultation exercise to be undertaken with anyone who may be affected or otherwise may have an interest in the policy.

The consultation generated three responses being received which in turn resulted in a minor change to the draft policy.

The ‘trained’ Members of the Licensing Committee had considered the review of the policy at their meeting held on 18 September 2018 in detail and resolved that the amended draft policy be approved and RECOMMENDED to Council for formal adoption.

Only Council could formally adopt this Policy, it is not a decision that could be delegated to a Committee or Sub-Committee.  Once approved by Council, the Licensing Authority must then publish the policy, along with a Statutory Notice regarding the implementation date, also.

The recommendations in the report were then moved, seconded and voted upon without discussion. 

RESOLVED that the recommendation from the Licensing Committee be accepted and the amended draft policy referred to as ‘The Gambling Policy (Statement of Principles)’ be approved and adopted.  The revised document to be published in accordance with the relevant regulations and become effective from January 2019

Members gave consideration to a report, presented by the Chairman of the Governance and Audit Committee, which sought agreement to a number of minor amendments to the Constitution.

These related to the introduction of the New Animal Welfare Regulations and also amendments to permit consideration being given to cancelling meetings during significant National Events or Emergencies.

The recommendations were moved and seconded.

Prior to being put to the vote a Member brought to the attention of the meeting two typographical errors within the proposed amended pages.

Officers undertook to amend these prior to re-publication and on that basis it was: -

RESOLVED that the amendments to the Constitution as set out in Appendices A and B be approved.