Meeting documents

     COUNCIL

     Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on

     26 February 1998

PRESENT

Cllr Mrs F W Alexander (in the Chair)

Cllr L Ali

Cllr R W A Barber 

Cllr Mrs E M Barratt JP

Cllr C D Bates

Cllr S R Billingham

Cllr J M Blanksby

Cllr J M Campbell

Cllr Mrs L M Clarke

Cllr D J Coe

Cllr I M Coleman

Cllr E H Collins

Cllr R B Colomb

Cllr D A E Cox

Cllr D E Done

Cllr Mrs K M Draper

Cllr A A Dunford

Cllr A Dunn

Cllr C J Elliott

Cllr Mrs J E Gabbitas

Cllr A Gielgud

Cllr S H Graham

Cllr D A B Green

Cllr Mrs E Hall

Cllr P J Herschel

Cllr A E Hill

Cllr B T A Holland

Cllr M D Huddy

Cllr Miss B M Hughes

Cllr R W Jennings

Cllr Mrs E M Lay

Cllr Miss D A Lewis

Cllr Mrs C C Martens

Cllr Mrs C E Mill

Cllr P J Moore

Cllr A R Mountford

Cllr R J Nagle

Cllr C B Oliver

Cllr Mrs P I O=Rourke

Cllr M B Oram

Cllr Mrs K M Peatey MBE JP

Cllr B R Pollock

Cllr J W Preston

Cllr Mrs P Priestley

Cllr R C Pushman

Cllr Mrs J Riddington

Cllr D A C Shakespeare

Cllr A J Tanner

Cllr Mrs J E Teesdale

Cllr N P Vickery

Cllr Mrs J S R Waite

(Apologies for absence were received from Councillors I B Campbell, D J Carroll, P J Cartwright, A D Collingwood, D G Fieldhouse, Mrs A E Hardy, Mrs V A Letheren and Mrs B J Sadler)

1.     MINUTES

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 5 January 1998 be approved as a true record and signed by the Chairman.

2.     CHAIRMAN=S ANNOUNCEMENT

Chairman=s Reception - Thursday 5 March 1998

The Chairman requested Members and Officers to arrive at the Council Reception by 7.10pm/7.15pm to assist with welcoming guests.

3.     COUNCIL TAX SETTING 1998/99

Minute No. 82 of the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee held on 9 February 1998 and Minute No. 50 Part II (i) and Part III (i) (ii) and (iii) of the Housing and Economic Development Committee held on 12 January 1998, together with additional information relating to Council Tax was submitted.

The Chairman of the Council invited the Chairman of the Housing and Economic Development Committee to move formally the recommendations set out in Minute No. 50 Part II (i) and Part III (i) (ii) and (iii) of the meeting of the Housing and Economic Development Committee held on 12 January 1998, and the Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee to move formally the recommendations set out in Minute No. 82 of the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee held on 9 February 1998.

The Chairman of the Housing and Economic Development Committee formally moved the recommendations and drew attention to the proposed mobile home site rent increase for 1998/99 of 3.7% and Housing and Economic Development Committee General Fund estimate for 1998/99 of ,2,267,600.  Attention was also drawn to funding for service improvement for 1998/99 of ,874,600 of which ,298,500 for car parking had already been approved.

The Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee formally moved the recommendations and  then presented his budget speech, the major parts of which are summarised below.  (Copies of the highlights of the budget address have been despatched to Members of the Council and local media following the meeting).

Introducing his budget speech, the Chairman thanked the officers for achieving a satisfactory budget in line with the request of the current administration to seek net revenue estimates of ,13,612,700 and a Council Tax for 1998/99 of ,81.15.  He referred to the recommendations submitted to the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee on 9 February 1998, and drew attention to the lack of opposition to any of the proposed major items of expenditure considered at the meeting.  The Chairman then formally proposed the recommendations set out under Paragraphs 1.12 and 1.13 of the additional information relating to Council Tax.

This proposal was duly seconded by Councillor R J Nagle.

During the last three years the Council had lost over ,800,000 of Government funding equivalent to ,12.70 at Band D.  The proposed Council Tax increase based on the recommendation of the Policy and Resources Committee would be just ,9.47 in the same period.

Since the current administration set its first budget in February 1996, budgets reflecting savings of over ,3.8 million had been achieved, and just under ,3 million of this had been reinvested into new or improved services.  It had been possible to achieve all of this in 1998/99 despite losing ,416,000 (13.3%) of the Council=s Revenue Support  Grant, which after an increase of ,54,000 (1%) in Council=s NNDR redistribution, left a ,362,000 overall decrease in Government support.

The Council still had one of the lowest Standard Spending Assessments for an authority of its size, and a wide variety of services.  The Government by increasing the Council=s capping level by 1.5% as part of a shift away from central funding had indicated that local taxation should be used to replace lost grant aid.

The Chairman referred to the Council=s various successes in 1997/98 which include continued provision of quality and value for money services; obtaining three more Charter Marks; gaining a total of seven Charter Marks and four ISO 9002 awards since 1995 and continued budget savings making possible a programme of new and improved services.  Other successes had seen the successful expansion of CCTV, new transportation initiatives including positive parking, installation of London Road bus lane and repairs to multi-storey car parks.  New town centre improvements were being promoted including pedestrianisation works, and the Castlefield Community Centre had been built and opened.  Anti-deprivation and equalities development officers had been appointed and 450 affordable housing units had been provided by the Council since 1995.

He then proceeded to outline the aims of the current administration for 1998/99.  These included making provision for an investment of over ,1m in new or improved services; finalising the pedestrianisation and CCTV schemes; implementing new short stay car parking charges and pay on foot systems; providing safer car parks with CCTV and intercom facilities; commencement of the Western Sector Development; a new Enterprise Centre for small businesses; continuing to support the Castlefield Challenge; publicising the Council=s Leisure 21 and Local Plan and continuing in earnest to secure more efficient and value for money services.

The impact of the Bucks County Council budget decisions was also addressed and reference made to the severe cuts to services affecting residents in the District.  The decision of the County Council to use balances to keep the Council Tax low in 1997/98 had led to to a drop of over ,5m on the County Council capping level.  Even though the County Council obtained ,5m in additional Government  support in 1997/98 its decision to tax at capping level in 1998/99 resulted in the need to increase its Council Tax demands by just short of a further ,12m and still make further service cuts.

In concluding his budget speech the Chairman identified areas where the current administration was planning for the future.  It was intending to be more prudent in its budgeting, to separate service enhancement into two types, recurring and non-recurring, to ensure maximum use of surpluses without damaging future expectations.  If spending was below the capping level the Government would assess the Council as meeting all its needs at this level and reduce future Standard Spending Assessment and capping levels.  For 1998/99 the Council was currently ,172,000 below the maximum capping level, and the need to plan in a prudent manner for the long term and not on a year to year basis was emphasised by the Chairman.  The prevention of hardship in the district was important although the current administration recognised that it would not be possible to assist all those who were in need, and in particular those affected by the Bucks County Council spending cuts.  Very little additional funds were available under the Council=s available powers to spend on the community and the Policy and Resources Committee had earlier in the month agreed a budget that still needed to be refined by ,84,800, to give a total figure of ,874,600.  Officers would still be asked to find savings during the forthcoming financial year to achieve this.

The Council was requested that in order to give its maximum support to those areas in need, reconsideration of the priorities for service improvement should take place.  The Chairman proposed that the Council should stay within its maximum spending levels and add a further ,150,000 to budgets to give flexibility to assist in those areas considered necessary.  This would result in the setting of a Council Tax for 1998/99 at a Band D equivalent of ,83.49, an increase of ,150,000 over the previous Policy and Resources Committee recommendation on the Consolidated Revenue Estimates.

The Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group congratulated the Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee for his budget proposals for 1998/99.  He confirmed that the Bucks County Council had set a Council Tax at a Band D equivalent of ,547.15, an increase of ,52.75, a 10.67% increase and stated that the County Council had only been able to achieve this increase after swingeing cuts to services which would seriously affect the residents in the district.  The County Council had indicated that the reason for its actions was the significant decrease in central government grants, however, the District Council had lost over 13% of its revenue support grant for 1998/99 while the County Council actually received  a small increase.

He considered that the actions of the County Council would impact on the district with Council Tax payers blaming the District Council for the increase in Council Tax and also for the cuts in County Council  services.  He emphasised that it was essential to do everything possible to prevent hardship as a result of the County Council cuts, and whilst it would not be possible to overcome all the problems caused by the decisions of the County Council he felt that investigations should be carried out to see if action could be taken to alleviate some of these problems.  By making an additional provision immediately it would allow the District Council to address some of the issues as far as it was legally able to, and provide further funding in some of this Council=s own service areas.  Due to the complexity of the situation regarding the County Council cuts, it would be necessary to review in detail at a future date the precise spending areas and priorities.

The following amendment was therefore proposed by Councillor M B Oram and duly seconded by Councillor E H Collins:

In order for all Members of the Council to understand the impact of the amendment the proposer had requested the officers to prepare a revised report which was circulated on lilac coloured paper.  These new papers completely replaced the Additional Information on Council Tax and the recommendations in paragraphs 1.12 and 1.13 of the separate report previously circulated.  The papers also included all the Policy and Resources Committee recommendations with the amendments referred to in bold, italic type.  The key change appeared in paragraph 1.13(ii)(G) of the revised report which indicated the proposed new District Council basic amount of Council Tax at Band D.

The seconder of the amendment indicated his pleasure at being able to second the amendment and congratulated the Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee and officers on the proposals, and work undertaken in connection with this matter.

The Leader of the Conservative Group expressed her disappointment and concern at the revised report, emphasising that the report now circulated had not allowed Members any time to read and consider the proposed changes.  She requested a determination from the District Solicitor as to whether the circulation of this revised report complied with Access to Information requirements.

The District Solicitor informed Members that he considered this a legitimate circulation of information.

The Leader of the Conservative Group then proposed an alternative amendment of a Council Tax for the Council for 1998/99 of ,74.10 at Band D and a reduction in the Consolidated Revenue Estimates to ,13,166,700 from the ,13,612,700 proposed.

She informed Members that this year the Council Tax payers in the District faced an enormous increase in the County Council=s element of the Council Tax due to the present government=s iniquitous settlement.  She thought  the current Council administration realised the hardship this would cause, but an unnecessary burden of a 7.4% increase was being proposed.  Members were reminded that at the last meeting of the Council the Conservative Group proposal to set up an all party Working Group to review projected revenue expenditure and take a fresh look at all the services provided by the Council had been rejected.  She felt therefore that as a result of this, no thorough in-depth study had been carried out.  Revenue estimates had been looked at in a cursory way by the various committees but only as part of a long agenda and no real review had been undertaken.  Conservative Members had raised many pertinent questions to which they received no answers, and it was felt that Members of the current administration had given approval to many items with no understanding of what they were approving.  Rather than seek to find savings the current administration had put forward various service enhancements which the Conservative Members felt unable to support, the one exception being the ,40,000 to assist the hard-pressed voluntary sector.

The creation of new posts had occurred which would lead to further demands for funding.  New posts had been created last year, and this year had seen requests for increased funding for these posts.  The Conservative Group had identified ,446,000 of unnecessary expenditure, and last year had asked why the ,900,000 paid in settlement on Wycombe Swan was not repaid to the Council Tax payers.  The current administration was asked to identify what had happened to this sum of money as this amount together with those costs which had been recovered amounted to ,1.2 million and could have reduced the Council Tax by approximately ,19.

The Council=s external auditors had commented on the lack of monitoring by Members within the Council, and in an attempt to probe various areas of Council expenditure, the Conservative Group had not been able to ascertain answers to a number of questions.

The following further amendment was then formally proposed by Councillor Mrs P Priestley and seconded by Councillor R W Jennings:

AThat the Council=s spending plans be reduced by ,446,000 and the Council Tax at Band D be ,74.10.@

The Chairman of the Council informed Members that in order to facilitate the proper conduct of the Council=s business, discussion would take place on both amendments at the same time in accordance with S.O 11.2.6.

Members speaking in support of the first amendment expressed surprise that the Conservative Members had indicated that no detailed review had been taking place as proposed savings had been discussed with officers and put into service improvements.  Support for the provision of an additional ,150,000 was welcomed and various Members spoke in support of this, drawing attention to the embarrassment caused to them following the recent decisions taken by the County Council.

Members speaking against the first amendment were critical of the method by which the proposal had evolved, pointing out that it could have been discussed and commented on by Members at a much earlier date.  Members supporting the second amendment felt that this would allow the public to afford commensurate growth in the Council Tax level.  Care and consideration of the Council Tax payers in the District had to be recognised, and support for the second amendment was proposed by those Members supporting this course of action who also re-emphasised that had the all-party Working Group been set up as suggested, argument over the detail now going on would have been reduced.

The seconder of the first amendment reminded Members of those areas of concern to residents in the District, ie crime, youth employment, protecting the local economy, social housing, needs of local people and stated that the proposed budget put forward ways to overcome these concerns.  He applauded the proposer of the first amendment in an endeavour to redress some of the savage cuts made by the Bucks County Council.

The seconder of the second amendment informed the Council that the Conservative Group had at the last meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee been denied the opportunity to ask three questions on the budget.  The circulation of the Information Sheet clarifying answers to questions made at that meeting had only just been circulated and had not allowed time for any meaningful comment.

The Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee stated that he had delayed circulation of this Information Sheet until suitable responses to the questions raised had been prepared as he felt this was in the best interests of Members.

The proposer of the first amendment hoped that Members would agree that the local government financial settlement required further examination, and the realisation that local government deserved better would come out of the current procedures and arrangements.  The current administration was  working well and even allowing for the additional provision of ,150,000, difficult decisions and discussions with the voluntary sector would need to take place if the Council was to provide assistance as intended.

The proposer of the second amendment reiterated the effect the proposals would have on the Council Tax payers in the District.  She added that she had no problem with the proposed additional provision of ,150,000 but felt that this sum should be found from other savings, and not added to the original budget figure.

In responding, the Chairman of Policy and Resources Committee expressed his belief that the Members now had the best financial information available.

It was important for the District Council not to fall into the same position as the Bucks County Council and budget for the long term to maintain Council services and secure the highest possible level of Central Government financial support.

The District Council had to show the government that money was spent in a reasonable way, balancing the interests of the Council tax payer against the benefits the expenditure would bring.  The proposal now put forward demonstrated this.

It was proposed by Councillor Mrs P Priestley and seconded by Councillor P J Cartwright, supported by seven other Members rising in their places as required by Standing Order 16.3.1 that a  recorded vote be taken on the two amendments put forward.

On the first amendment being put to the vote, there was thereupon recorded the following:

In Favour

Cllr Mrs F W Alexander

Cllr L Ali

Cllr Mrs E M Barratt JP

Cllr C D Bates

Cllr S R Billingham

Cllr J M Blanksby

Cllr J M Campbell

Cllr D J Coe

Cllr I M Coleman

Cllr E H Collins

Cllr D E Done

Cllr Mrs K M Draper

Cllr A A Dunford

Cllr C J Elliott

Cllr Mrs J E Gabbitas

Cllr A Gielgud

Cllr S H Graham

Cllr Mrs E Hall

Cllr P J Herschel

Cllr M D Huddy

Cllr Mrs C C Martens

Cllr Mrs C E Mill

Cllr P J Moore

Cllr A R Mountford

Cllr R J Nagle

Cllr M B Oram

Cllr Mrs P I O=Rourke

Cllr B R Pollock

Cllr J W Preston

Cllr Mrs J Riddington

Cllr A J Tanner

Cllr N P Vickery

Cllr Mrs J S R Waite

Total = 33

Against

Cllr R W A Barber

Cllr Mrs L M Clarke

Cllr R B Colomb

Cllr D A E Cox

Cllr A Dunn

Cllr D A B Green

Cllr A E Hill

Cllr B T A Holland

Cllr Miss B M Hughes

Cllr R W Jennings

Cllr Mrs E M Lay

Cllr Miss D Lewis

Cllr C B Oliver

Cllr Mrs K M Peatey MBE JP

Cllr Mrs P Priestley

Cllr R C Pushman

Cllr D A C Shakespeare

Cllr Mrs J E Teesdale

Total = 18

Abstentions = 0

On the second amendment being put to the vote, there was thereupon recorded the following:

In favour

Cllr R W A Barber

Cllr Mrs L M Clarke

Cllr R B Colomb

Cllr D A E Cox

Cllr A Dunn

Cllr D A B Green

Cllr A E Hill

Cllr B T A Holland

Cllr Miss B M Hughes

Cllr R W Jennings

Cllr Mrs E M Lay

Cllr Miss D Lewis

Cllr C B Oliver

Cllr Mrs K M Peatey MBE JP

Cllr Mrs P Priestley

Cllr R C Pushman

Cllr D A C Shakespeare

Cllr Mrs J E Teesdale

Total = 18

Abstentions = 0

On the substantive motion (as amended by the first amendment) being put to the vote, 32 voted in favour and 18 against.

RESOLVED: (i) That the amount of service enhancement to be included in the 1998/99 estimates be set at ,1,024,600 and a refining exercise be undertaken in the new financial year.

(ii) that bids for funding be invited by 13 March following which discussions take place with organisations with Members and officers considering the bids which will be submitted to Policy and Resources Committee for spending approval on 27 April.

(iii) that net expenditure of ,13,876,400 be met from the General Fund on behalf of Wycombe District Council for 1998/99;

(iv) that net expenditure of ,348,700 be approved from the Special Expenses Account on behalf of the unparished area of High Wycombe Town for 1998/99;

(v) that the non-recurring service enhancements of ,462,400 be funded from 1997/98 operating surpluses/ windfall income (technically use of balances);

(vi) that the consolidated revenue estimates be approved in the sum of ,13,762,700;

(vii) that the Chief Executive and Director of Finance in consultation with the Policy and Resources Committee Briefing Group be granted delegated authority to approve the distribution of balances and reserves when closing the final accounts;

(viii) that the 1998/99 General Fund spending position be kept under review and in the event that an operating surplus is maintained during the course of the financial year then a separate report be brought back on the transfer of Saunderton Hostel from the Housing Revenue Account into the Housing and Economic Development Committee General Fund;

(ix) that the aggregate demand from General Fund (excluding parish precepts) and Special Expenses account for 1998/99 to be met from Revenue Support Grant, redistributed NNDR and Collection Fund be approved in the sum of  ,13,762,700:

(x) that the report on the Collection Fund requirement be agreed as a surplus of ,96,230 (,1.50 per Band D equivalent property);

(xi) that the list of Parish Town Council and Charter Trustees `precept requests= be noted as shown in Appendix A to these Minutes;

(xii) that a rent increase equivalent to an average of ,1.22 per property per week be implemented from 1 April 1998, generating approximately ,465,000;

(xiii) that the charges as detailed in paragraph 7.44 of the report submitted to the Housing and Economic Development Committee on 12 January 1998 be agreed and implemented from 1 April 1998;

(xiv) that the Housing and Economic Development Committee estimates be accepted as presented in Appendix 7C to the meeting held on 12 January 1998; and

(xv) that it be noted that at its meeting on 5 January 1998 the Council calculated the following amounts for the year 1998/99 in accordance with regulations made inter alia under Sections 33 and 34 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:

(a)  64,111.98 being the amount calculated by the Council, in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 1992, (Athe Regulations@) as its Council Tax Base for the year.

(B)

being the amounts calculated by the Council, in accordance with Regulation 6 of the Regulations, as the amounts of its Council Tax Base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more of the special items relate;

(A) ,73,637,381     being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 32(2)(a) to (e) of the Act;

(B) ,58,756,500     being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 32(3)(a) to (c) of the Act;

(C) ,14,880,881     being the amount by which the aggregate at (ii)(A) above exceeds the aggregate at (ii)(B) above, calculated by the Council in accordance with Section 32(4) of the Act, as its budget requirement for the year;

(D) ,8,061,079     being the aggregate of the sums which the Council estimates will be payable for the year into its General Fund in respect of redistributed non-domestic rates and revenue support grant increased by the amount of the sums which the Council estimates will be transferred in the year from its Collection Fund to its General Fund in accordance with Section 97(3) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988;

(E) ,106.37     being the amount at (ii)(C) above less the amount at (ii)(D) above, all divided by the amount at (i)(A) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 33(1) of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year;

(F) ,1,466,881     being the aggregate amount of all special items referred to in Section 34(1) of the Act;

(G) ,83.49          being the amount at (ii)(E) above less the result given by dividing the amount at (ii)(F) above by the amount at (i)(A) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates:

(H) 

being the amounts given by adding to the amount at (ii)(G) above the amounts of each of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council=s area mentioned above divided in each case by the appropriate amount at (i)(B) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(3) of the Act, as the basic amounts of its Council Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more of the special items relate.

being the amounts given by multiplying the amounts at (ii)(G) and (ii)(H) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5(1) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36(1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands.

Precepting Authority     Valuation Bands

Precepting Authority     Valuation Bands

4.     POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE

The Minutes of the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee held on 9 February 1998 were submitted.

Minute No. 79 - Treasury Policy and Strategy Statement 1998/99

A Member reminded the Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee that it had been agreed at the meeting that a list of the approved lending institutions would be forwarded to those members who had requested them.  The Chairman undertook to expedite the circulation of the information requested.  

Minute No. 80 - Review of the Capital Programme

On the Capital Programme a Member expressed her disappointment at the exclusion from the Capital Programme of the proposed Youth Centre at Micklefield.  She suggested that savings were made elsewhere in the Programme to fund this scheme.

Another Member referred to the works required to the Guildhall, a Grade 1 listed building, and questioned where reference to the proposed funding was in the Capital Programme submitted.  The Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee clarified that the works to the Guildhall did not form part of the Capital Programme.

The Chairman of the Housing and Economic Development Committee drew attention to a forthcoming seminar by Chapman Hendy on the Council=s housing stock, when Members would be able to hear the various options and possibilities available.  The Chairman of the Committee commented that she was not convinced that the provision of a Youth Centre at Micklefield was required but residents would need to be asked for their views prior to any further progress in the matter.

Following a question from a Member Council was advised of the skills training initiative involved and other parts of the Single Regeneration Budget which were considered essential to maximise employment opportunities for those unemployed in the district wishing to return to work.

Minute No. 86 - Village Shop Rate Relief Scheme

A Member indicated her pleasure at being able to support the policy being put forward by the Committee.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee held on 9 February 1998 be received and the recommendations contained therein be approved and adopted.  (NB: The recommendation contained in Minute No. 82 was approved as amended under Minute No. 47 at this Council meeting).

5.     HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

The Minutes of the meeting of the Housing and Economic Development Committee held on 12 January 1998 were submitted.

Minute No. 49 - Marlow Tourist Information Centre

A Member congratulated those members of staff at the Marlow Tourist Information Centre for the work carried out by them over the last 12 months.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Housing and Economic Development Committee held on 12 January 1998 be received.  (NB: The recommendations contained in Minute No. 50 Part II(i) and Part III(ii) and (iii) were approved under Minute No. 47 at this Council meeting).

6.     COMMUNITY AND LEISURE COMMITTEE

The Minutes of the meeting of the Community and Leisure Committee held on 19 January 1998 were submitted.  

Attendance List

Councillor Mrs P Priestley requested that her name be included in the list of Members attending this meeting.

Minute No. 35 - Panel Minutes

Minute No. 19 - Application to hold fun fair at Totteridge Common

A Member reminded the Chairman of the Committee that a response to his question on the income received from renting out Totteridge Common for fairground use had been promised at the last meeting of the Council, but to date he had not received the information requested.

The Chairman undertook to expedite the answer to the information requested.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Community and Leisure Committee held on 19 January 1998 be received.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Planning, Environment and Transportation Committee held on 26 January 1998 were submitted.

MINUTES PET PANEL - 1 DECEMBER 1997

Minute No. 12 - Dial-a-Ride Concessions

A Member referred to the need for applicants to obtain certification in order to obtain concessionary fares tokens for Dial-a-Ride and to the medical costs incurred by these applicants in obtaining certification.

The Chairman of the Housing Economic and Development Panel informed the Council that there was a one off charge incurred for certification, and that it was only new members to the Dial-a-Ride Scheme who required the necessary certification.

Minute No. 53 - Notice of Motion No 2 - The Beef Bones Regulations 1997

The proposer of the Notice of Motion expressed her disappointment at the delay in the Council processing consideration of this matter and reminded the Council that the appropriate legislation had now been approved and she felt it too late to achieve any action.  

The Chairman of the Planning, Environment and Transportation Committee informed Members that notwithstanding the comments of the Member this matter in future would be closely monitored by the officers.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning, Environment and Transportation Committee held on 26 January 1998 be received and the recommendation contained therein approved and adopted.

8.     QUESTIONS UNDER STANDING ORDER 9.1.2

APublic Consultation on the closure of Booker Hospital by the Buckinghamshire Health Authority

Would the Chairman of the Community and Leisure Committee, please ensure that a response to the above public consultation includes the following points.

For the thousands of residents who have used Booker Hospital, over the years, Booker has rightly earned its reputation for a homely, comforting and caring environment.

We as the elected representatives of the district, must ensure that the unelected and thus unaccountable executive of the relevant bodies take note of our concerns, and if necessary, we should write to the Secretary of State for Health to register our grave concerns as the proposed closure is purely on financial grounds not the interests of the patients.@

Answer from Chairman of Community and Leisure Committee - Councillor J W Preston

ABuckinghamshire Health Authority proposal to bring forward the closure of Booker Hospital and the transfer of its services

The Booker Hospital was originally scheduled to close in the year 2000 but the proposal to bring forward the closure of the hospital is due to the Trust having to deliver a balanced financial plan for 1998/99.

The hospital provides rehabilitation care for elderly people.  The intention is not to replace fully the equivalent bed provision elsewhere.  Up to 40 beds can be re-provided at Amersham Hospital and the three Community hospitals of Chesham, Marlow and Chalfonts and Gerrards Cross which represent up to 90% of the usage made at Booker.

The Trust is looking to focus enhanced community services on those patients who would have been admitted to Booker Hospital from the High Wycombe area.  Where appropriate, support and care will be provided at home.  To this end, a new "care at night" service is being piloted in the Wycombe district.  This is a unique joint service providing health and social care between the hours of 6.00 p.m. and 7.30 a.m. and a 24 hour telephone helpline to health care and social service professionals.

Further development of the "elderly persons integrated care scheme (EPICS)@ is also being considered.  This scheme enables elderly people to remain at home rather than be admitted to hospital.  The service will be implemented in Amersham and Chesham from April 1998 and extended to Wycombe and other parts of the Trust's catchment area in due course.

In addition to the matters put forward as real concerns by Cllr Vickery, I will include the following as part of the Council's response to the Health Authority in the event the proposals go ahead as set out in the consultation paper:

ADoes the Chairman agree, that in recognition of their office, Members should adopt a formal style of dress when attending public meetings in this Council Chamber?@

Answer from Chairman of Council - Councillor Mrs F W Alexander

AYes@

AFinnamore Wood

Now that the property is being offered for sale by the Home Office, does the Chairman agree that it would be in the interests of the residents of both the immediate area and the District as a whole to declare what Members= preferred future use would be?@

Answer from Chairman of Planning, Environment and Transportation Committee - Councillor D E Done

AAgents acting for the Prison Service have had a number of discussions with Planning Officers, and others, as a precursor to their marketing the site, now that it has been decided it is surplus to requirements.   The agents sought to establish that a use falling within the "residential institutions" Use Class could take place on the land/buildings as currently existing without the need for planning permission.  To this end they submitted an application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for this proposed use.  That application is determined on facts and legal interpretation, rather than policies and planning merits, and has been refused.

It is almost inevitable that whatever a prospective purchaser wishes to do with the site will require planning permission.  It would be wholly wrong of the Council to in any way fetter its position on an application which has yet to be submitted.  If an application is submitted then, by law, the Council must determine it "in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise".  This means that the starting point for considering an application must be the policies in the Structure Plan and currently adopted Local Plan.  These policies set a robust framework for considering proposals for this site which lies within the Open Countryside and Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  Proposals for, say, a housing redevelopment of the site would not accord with those policies.  

If a proposal were submitted which did not accord with the policies then it would be necessary to decide whether there were very special circumstances which outweighed their normal application.  That can only properly be decided on the basis of a specific application for planning permission for a specific scheme, taking into account the representations made in response to consultations and all the other "material considerations".  These would, of course, include the history of the site.  To express a view at this stage, on a preferred use for the site could well prejudice the Councils' quasi-judicial position as Local Planning Authority.

In potentially the longer term, the Council will also need to consider what position it should take on the site in the context of the review of the Local Plan.  Once again, it would be wholly inappropriate to fetter that review process by dealing with this site in isolation, and in advance of the necessary full and structured consideration of the Plan as a whole.  Decisions on the review of the Local Plan cannot be driven by the marketing decisions of landowners.@

AIt is agreed the correct balance between public and private transport must be struck to ensure the continued vitality of the District=s economy.  Restrictions on town centre commuter car-parking, and the encouragement of car-sharing, are accepted as parts of the equation.

The District Council Offices are as valid a town centre function as business offices, needing to be accessible both by employees and visitors.

Answer from Chairman of Housing and Economic Development Committee - Councillor Mrs C C Martens

The Council Offices rear car park provides a total of 200 car parking bays. These are allocated in the following way;

General parking bays          -     180

Member only parking bays     -     7

Disabled bays               -     6

Contractor bays               -     4

Cycle bay                    -     1

Wardens bay               -     1

Loading bay               -     1

A further 16 bays (including 2 reserved for disabled people and 1 for the Chairman of the Council) are available for public parking at the front of the Council Offices (off Queen Victoria Road). However, the Council Offices front car park is unavailable for Council officers parking.

The current car parking ratio of spaces to area standard is a maximum of 1 car parking space for every 50 m2 of gross floor area for town centre offices. This standard was adopted in November 1995.

The previous standard, adopted in 1989, was a minimum of 1 car parking space for every 25m2 of gross floor area for town centre offices, although it was accepted that where appropriate a commuted payment towards off site public parking could be accepted in lieu of full on-site provision.

Following the addition of the rear office section to the Council Offices complex in the early 1990's, the total gross floor area provided by the Council offices is 8,007 m2.

The Council offices rear car park provides a ratio of 1 car parking space per 40m2.

However, if an office complex comprising a gross floor area of 8,007m2 were built today, a maximum of 160 car parking spaces would be allowed under the current car parking standards.

The current eligibility criteria for staff parking in the Council offices rear car park are;

260 staff and 58 members have use of the Council Offices rear car park by virtue of the above criteria.

There are currently 183 people with essential user designations.

The exact number of staff sharing cars is not known. However, as part of the work towards "developing a green transportation plan" the Council's Transport Projects team will be undertaking a staff survey, part of which will ask staff about current travel arrangements.@

AWhat specific public relations actions is this Council undertaking or planning to undertake to counteract the negative image of High Wycombe created by the Operation Cruiser - Castlefield television programme.@

Answer from Chairman of Council - Councillor Mrs F W Alexander

AA series of press releases have been issued by the Castlefield Challenge team, in response to the BBC television programme, AThe Force@, which focused on Castlefield.

The first was released immediately following the programme and it strongly refuted the negative image of Castlefield and more specifically its community, portrayed in the film.  The release listed some of the very positive community activities and Castlefield Challenge projects which are being seen on the estate.  The Bucks Free Press (BFP) ran an article on the Friday following the programme which accurately reflected these.

Subsequently a community meeting was organised on the 10 February to discuss the issues raised in AThe Force@ and this was supported by Fiona Dent, Castlefield Community Worker.  The  community=s views on the programme were then reported in the BFP the following Friday.  Officers issued a second press release to coincide with this meeting, listing in more detail the achievements and aims of the Castlefield Challenge programme.

As result of this second release, officers understand that the BFP-Midweek will be running an article on the District Council=s redevelopment of the Nursery Green open space in Castlefield, following the commencement of works on 9 February.@

9.     POLITICAL GROUPS

Members were advised that Councillor J M Blanksby had given formal notice that he intended to continue his Council service as an Independent with no alignment with any one political group.  As a political group had to comprise two or more members the number of political groups within the Council was now three.

10.     APPOINTMENTS TO OUTSIDE ORGANISATIONS

RESOLVED: That Councillor A Gielgud be appointed in place of Councillor E H Collins as one of the Council representatives on the South East Employers.

11.     REPORT OF THE RETURNING OFFICER

The Returning Officer reported that Alexander Peter Thomas Stone had resigned as a District Councillor for the Lane End and Piddington District Ward with effect from 22 February 1998.

(The meeting commenced at 6.30pm and concluded at 8.55pm)

     ______________

     CHAIRMAN

The following officers were in attendance at the meeting

Mr R J Cummins - Chief Executive and Director of Finance

Mr H Potts - Director of Property and Housing

Mr P F Ricketts - Director of Corporate Services

Mr W N Roberts - Director of Leisure, Health and Community

Mr C A Swanwick - Director of Planning Transport and Development

Mrs J E Clements - Head of Corporate and Committee Administration

Mr D M Dongray - District Solicitor

Mr J B Piddington - Head of Financial Services

Mr R G Key - Principal Administrator Committee Services Section