48.

MINUTES

RESOLVED:      That the Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 22 October 2001 be received and approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

49.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

50.

REPORT OF THE RETURNING OFFICER

51.

CHAIRMAN’S ANNOUNCEMENTS

52.

QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

(a)

Question from Mr B Reid to the Cabinet Member for Community

     “Does the Cabinet Member agree with the Social Improvement and Scrutiny Committee that, in light of the community needs appraisal, the proposal for a Community Development Trust and a Community Development Worker are both timely and greatly needed?”

     Reply from Councillor A R Green, Deputy Leader of the Council

     “The original funding application was submitted by Wycombe REC as part of their 2001/02 annual revenue grant application.  Consideration of this application by the Policy and Resources Committee in March 2001 was deferred pending completion of a community needs appraisal on the African-Caribbean community.  This was completed in October 2001 and concluded that the postholder should be managed by a specially established Community Development Trust.

     I agree that the community needs appraisal offers a good justification for the local employment of an African-Caribbean Community Development Officer and this matter will be further discussed by Cabinet on Wednesday this week.  However, I think it is important that many of the needs identified, particularly those in the social, educational and health arenas are matters for other statutory bodies and I would hope that they could be persuaded to support this application.”

     Supplementary Question

     “There has been a real groundswell in support of an Afro-Caribbean Worker.  Whilst understanding the need for funding from other agencies, may I have assurance that this won’t be sidelined?”

     Supplementary Response

     “It is certainly not the intention of this administration to sideline this issue.  We do support the principle of getting this work in place.  Discussion will take place on Wednesday, I hope there is a satisfactory outcome.”

53.

QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS

(a)

Question to the Cabinet Member for Customer Services from Councillor M B Oram

(b)

Question to the Cabinet Member for Customer Services from Councillor J Dalton

(c)     Question to the Cabinet Member for Customer Services from Councillor J Dalton

     “In view of the considerable benefit of all the minor chalkstreams in the District, which enhance our environment and provide much pleasure to lovers of our countryside and all who live in the District and visitors alike - would he agree that for those streams other than major rivers which the Environment Agency take responsibility for seeing are cleared and run freely, should be routinely “looked after” and cleared, where necessary by this Council - improving the environment and equally therefore the upkeep being shared by all in the District who benefit from our unique heritage?”

     Reply from Councillor W J Bendyshe-Brown, Cabinet Member for Customer Services

     “Thank you for the interesting question in respect of this important natural asset.

     The Council participates in the Chilterns Chalkstreams project and is represented on the Steering Group by officers from Leisure Services.  This Forum is actively involved in the conservation of rivers throughout the District and the wider AONB.

     The Council has achieved a tremendous amount of improvement to the River Wye through its River Wye Study, which was published in 1992.  Whilst capital expenditure on river projects has largely ceased, the objectives of the study are still being rigorously pursued through the application of Local Plan Policy and by working in partnership with organisations such as the Environment Agency.  There is, however, no overall strategic management of rivers that fall outside the responsibility of the Environment Agency.  The Chalkstream project is in part designed to address this deficiency by encouraging good standards of management by riparian, or adjoining, landowners and securing funding for river improvements.

     The recent review of flood defence and land drainage has indicated that there are 37km of ordinary water courses for which the District Council is the operating authority.  Many of these are chalkstreams of the type identified in the question.

     The legal responsibility for maintaining these rests with the riparian owners and in broad terms this responsibility is carried out in a satisfactory way.  The flood defence review has identified a number of critical sections of water course and the proposal is to monitor these on a regular basis.  In all other locations, inspection and intervention will only be carried out on an exception basis when concerns or problems are brought to the attention of officers.

     The Council does have “permissive” authority over those elements of the 37km of water courses where it does not have riparian responsibility, and will consult fully with landowners where problems exist and will, if deemed necessary, undertake any necessary work and charge the landowner accordingly.  However, the Council could not afford to take on riparian responsibility for all this 37km of water courses.

     I believe that this balanced approach will use our limited resources most effectively and work to preserve our unique heritage for the benefit of all who live in or visit our District.”

     Supplementary Question

     “Most of the streams have many riparian owners, for example in my Ward a 50m stretch has 5 riparian owners.  Surely the effort put into contacting these is out of proportion to the end result?  I feel there is room for the Council to take on more responsibility rather than this falling onto riparian owners.”

     Supplementary Answer

     “I accept there are difficulties.  Following my letter to Members, we have identified 12 principal hotspots where flooding can occur.  Officers will be contacting local Members to arrange to walk the ground with them to get an idea of the problems.  Any problems can be highlighted then and I am happy to raise any other points individually.”

(d)     Question to the Leader of the Council from Councillor M B Oram

     “One of the features of the Modernising Agenda is the emphasis on Councillors’ representational role in the local community.  In the Marlow Town Area, Wycombe District Council nominates Councillors to 13 positions on 9 organisations.  Marlow Town is represented by 4 Liberal Democrats and 2 Conservatives and yet of the 13 positions, 12 have been given to Conservatives and only 1 to Liberal Democrats.  When is the Leader going to take action to amend these nominations so that all Councillors are given the chance to fulfil their representational role?”

     Reply from Councillor R C Colomb, Leader of the Council

     “I have done a little research since receiving Councillor Oram’s question and I am pleased to say that I concur with his statement that there are indeed 9 organisations within Marlow to which this Council is invited to nominate people.

     My record of those appointed, however, shows 11 Conservative Councillors, 1 Liberal Democrat Councillor and 1 local appointee who is not a District Councillor.

     Additionally, one of the appointments is to the Executive Committee of the Marlow and District Chamber of Trade and Commerce; although a specified Member is required for the Executive, any Marlow Member is welcome to attend meetings of the Chamber itself.

     Whenever possible, I try to follow the principle of appointing local Members and Councillor Oram cannot dispute that the appointments currently in place in the Marlow area are all taken by local Members.

     I do not believe that political balance rules apply to appointments to outside organisations; therefore I do not intend to make any changes to current memberships.

     If I can say so, one does not have to be the political appointee of the Council to play a role in local community groups.  For example, Councillor Kathy Dix is appointed to two bodies but is active in 9 organisations in her Ward and regularly contacts Cabinet Members about issues raised.  The Leisure Department sends out listings of events taking place by Wards.  This has not been sent to local Members, but I have requested that in the future, it will be sent to all local Members.  It has also come to my attention in the last few days that officers have meetings with groups of Members, but do not necessarily always include local Members.  I will ask the Chief Executive at my meeting with him tomorrow to ensure that local Members are always invited if officers are meeting with representatives of communities or local organisations.”

     Supplementary Question

     “Does he think this is right? Members report back to Wycombe Council. Is it right that only 1 Liberal Democrat of Marlow is an official WDC representative on a Marlow organisation?  Others are on groups in other means, but does he think it right for only one to have the chance to report back?”

     Supplementary Reply

     “We do ask Members to report back, I have looked at the feedback since 1996 and I have to say that the feedback has improved significantly since 1999. I feel I must also point out that although there are other parties on Marlow Town Council, that Council only appears to appoint Liberal Democrats to organisations."

(e)     Question to the Cabinet Member for Planning from Councillor N P Vickery

     “Could the Portfolio Holder please clarify his response to my previous question at Council, concerning developers’ contributions to the High Wycombe Transportation Strategy?  Could he confirm that money raised will be spent solely within the Town of High Wycombe and not anywhere else within the District?  Could he also supply a year by year breakdown of contributions made, not an accumulative figure, stating what is actually banked and what is still outstanding?”

     Response from Councillor P Rogerson, Cabinet Member for Planning

     “Thank you for your question and the opportunity to clarify the position specifically with regard to developer contributions.  The question, Chairman, may be short, but the answer is complex so I would ask that you exercise leniency in the time permitted.

     The answer to the first part of your question is “broadly yes”.

     Developer contributions collected within the Wycombe Transportation Strategy area are to be spent within that area.  However, this area extends beyond the “Town” of High Wycombe and includes West Wycombe, Widmer End, Bourne End and Flackwell Heath for example.

     Details of the way in which the District and County Councils operate this strategy are set out in the approved Supplementary Planning Guidance “Accessibility Zones, Parking Standards and Developer Contributions to Transportation, June 2000”.  I have placed a further copy in the Members’ Room if Members wish to consult this.

     The strategy area divides into 5 zones, 4 of which contain one of the main traffic corridors leading to the town centre.  The fifth covers the town centre itself.  Monies collected will in the main be expended in the zone where they have been collected, but other rules denote that they may be expended in the central area or other zone.  Monies collected within these zones may not be used to fund transport improvements which do not form part of the Wycombe Transport Strategy and which could indeed principally benefit other parts of the District.

     The second part of the question relates to the breakdown of the yearly sums collected.  These are as reported to the Joint Wycombe Transport Strategy Panel on 5 December and are as follows:

     As I indicated in my answer on 22 October, £1,555 was expended in 1999 on a lunchtime Christmas shuttle service between Cressex and the town centre.

     At present, therefore, £1,166,491 remains available to progress Transport Strategy measures.”

     Supplementary Question

     “The document referred to is from 2000.  Can the Portfolio Holder tell me that the High Wycombe Town Strategy referred to the High Wycombe town primarily prior to this and what happened to the money raised then?”

     Supplementary Answer

     “As I understand it, this supplements the previous Supplementary Planning Guidance, it is not ringfenced to the original zone of collection and can be spent in other zones.  I will seek further clarification and give the Member a written answer.”

(f)     Question to the Cabinet Member for Resources from Councillor N P Vickery

     “Could the Leader please give the Council a full update on the current superannuation situation regarding staff within Wycombe District Council?  Could he also confirm that the Council Tax payers may need to underwrite some superannuation payment, due to the County Council’s agents not performing to the expected standard over the last couple of years, and if this is the situation, could he please provide a figure and state from where this money will come?”

     Reply from Councillor R B Colomb, Leader of the Council

     “Local Authority superannuation funds are re-valued at 3 yearly intervals.

     Most funds being re-valued at this time are showing much reduced growth rates compared with the buoyant 1990s.  The Buckinghamshire fund to which Wycombe is a contributor shares this in addition to certain local factors.

     I can confirm that this Council already has some provision in the outline budget for a superannuation fund top-up.  It is likely additional funding will be required and the recommendation on this will be before the Council on 28 February 2002 along with next year’s estimates as a whole.  County and District Leaders have held a preliminary discussion on the scale of the issues and on options for action.  We are currently at a fact-finding stage and there will be a further meeting once this urgent work is complete.

     I will ensure that Members are kept informed, but it could be misleading to give incomplete, partly unchecked information at this stage.

     Individual employees, past and present, need have no cause for concern.  The fund is governed by statute and has very substantial assets - and therefore employee benefits are guaranteed.”

     Supplementary Question

     “Thank you for the response, this may be unfair as the report is the County Council’s not ours, but I understand the report has been circulated only behind closed doors, at what point do you see it becoming public?”

     Supplementary Response

     “The draft report was issued to the various partners in the fund, of which Wycombe District Council is one, last Thursday.  It has been discussed with the four District Council Leaders and the Resources Portfolio Holder of County Council and officers.  A further report is awaited.”

54.

CABINET - 7 NOVEMBER 2001

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Cabinet held on 7 November 2001 be received and the recommendations contained therein be approved and adopted subject to an addition to Minute 66 to read (f) “consideration be given to the 15% of Wycombe District residents who are unable to use wheelie bins and the proposed paper collection bins”.  

(Cllrs A F Fulford and D P Lambourne declared an interest and withdrew from the meeting during discussion on Cabinet Minute No 73.)

55.

ENVIRONMENT IMPROVEMENT AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE - 29 OCTOBER 2001

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Environment Improvement and Scrutiny Committee held on 29 October 2001 be received.

56.

ECONOMIC IMPROVEMENT AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE - 5 NOVEMBER 2001

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the meeting of the Economic Improvement and Scrutiny Committee held on 5 November 2001 be received.

57.

SOCIAL IMPROVEMENT AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE - 19 NOVEMBER 2001

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the meeting of the Social Improvement and Scrutiny Committee held on 19 November 2001 be received and the recommendation contained therein approved and adopted.

58.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 24 OCTOBER 2001, 14 NOVEMBER 2001 AND 5 DECEMBER 2001

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meetings of the Development Control Committee held on 24 October, 14 November and 5 December 2001 be received.

59.

REGULATORY AND APPEALS COMMITTEE - 27 NOVEMBER 2001

60.

QUESTIONS UNDER STANDING ORDER 11.2

61.

DETERMINATION OF COUNCIL TAX BASE 2002/03

RESOLVED:  That (a) the report of the Director of Corporate Services for the calculation of the Council Tax base for the Wycombe District Council area for 2002/2003 be approved;

62.

URGENT CHIEF OFFICER’S REPORT

63.

CLOSURE OF MEETING