Meeting documents

AVDC Cabinet
Tuesday, 6th November, 2001

Document: 2001-11-06 CABINET
 

PRESENT:  Councillor Mrs Morgan-Owen (in the chair);  Councillors Ashenden, James, Liverseidge, Mrs Paternoster, Mrs Polhill, Rowlands, Sir Beville Stanier and Stewart.  Councillors Baldwin, Mrs Baxter, Mrs Brandis, Cole, Mrs Glover, Richards and Stuart attended also.
 

APOLOGY: Councillor Cartwright.

 

1.

MINUTES
 

RESOLVED -
 

That the Minutes of 9th October, 2001 be approved as a correct record subject to the inclusion of Councillor Ashenden in the list of Members present.
 

2.

12 TOWNSEND, HADDENHAM - COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER
 

On 21st March, 2000, the Council had served a Repairs Notice to secure the preservation of this listed building.  However, the works specified in the Repairs Notice had not been carried out by the owner of the property and, therefore, in accordance with the decision of the Council of 8th March, 2000, a Compulsory Purchase Order had been made on 19th June, 2000.
 

The Human Rights Act had become operative on 2nd October, 2000.  Therefore, at the time the Council had decided to make a Compulsory Purchase Order, “convention rights”, (i.e. human rights secured under the European Convention on Human Rights) considerations raised by the decision had not been expressly referred to.  As it was quite possible that the statutory objectors might raise human rights considerations at the public inquiry to be held on 27th and 28th November, 2000, it was important for the Cabinet to consider these issues and decide whether or not to affirm the previous decision in the light of those issues.  (The making of a Compulsory Purchase Order was now an Executive function under the Local Government Act, 2000).
 

Accordingly consideration was given to the detailed report of the Director of Corporate Resources setting out the issues which it was felt should be taken into account when deciding whether or not to affirm the earlier decision.  These were Article 8: Right to Respect for Private and Family Life and the First Protocol - Article 1: Protection of Property.  The report, which incorporated a copy of the report submitted to Council on 8th March, 2000, had previously been circulated to all Members of the Council.  This set out in full the resolutions passed by the Council.
 

Members considered in detail the human rights issues as set out in the report submitted and were satisfied that the previous decisions could be affirmed, with the exception of the options regarding the eventual disposal and future preservation of the building, which they felt could be determined at a subsequent Cabinet meeting in the light of the Inspector's decision regarding valuation and compensation payments (if any) after the public inquiry, and the receipt of further details of refurbishment costs.  During the course of discussions, it was commented that there might be merit in submitting representations to the Local Government Association seeking the introduction of a national fund for the preservation of buildings of architectural and historic interest, similar to arrangements that existed in several other European countries, in order to remove the financial burden of such works which currently fell solely upon local council tax payers.  The Cabinet Member for Planned Development undertook to follow up this suggestion.
 

RESOLVED -
 

That having regard to considerations raised by the Human Rights Act, 1998, the decisions taken by the Council at its meeting on 8th March, 2000, (as now amended to reflect the new political management arrangements and as set out in the report submitted), be affirmed, with the exception of the options for future disposal/preservation which would be determined in the light of the Inspector's decision on the minimum compensation direction.
 

3.

6 ADDINGTON ROAD, BUCKINGHAM
 

RESOLVED -
 

That a small area of Council owned land at the rear of 6 Addington Road, Buckingham be sold to the owner of the property to facilitate the construction of a vehicle hard standing within the rear curtilage, on terms to be agreed by the Director of Planning, Property and Construction Services.
 

4.

CIVIC CENTRE CATERING
 

The Cabinet considered how the catering service at the Civic Centre should be provided from 1st August, 2002.  Given the ongoing discussions regarding the future maintenance and improvement of the Civic Centre, and the consideration being given to the possibility of new facilities being provided as part of the redevelopment of the town centre, it was
 

RESOLVED -
 

That the catering contract for the Civic Centre should continue to be let on an annual basis.
 

7.

GENERAL FUND BUDGET PLANNING 2002/2003
 

Members received the report of the Director of Corporate Resources giving further details on matters that needed to be taken into account when planning next year's budget.  This was one of a number of reports dealing with the budgetary planning process for 2002/2003.  The last such report had been submitted to the meeting on 9th October, 2001.
 

The latest report attempted to quantify more accurately the pressures (local, national and international) that would have an impact on the overall budget.  It explained the commonly used term “gearing effect” in relation to inflation provision and set out the current position regarding investment interest.  The report also contained options for balancing the budget although it was appreciated that any solution would almost certainly be based on a combination of all of them.  Officers were refining lists of unavoidable pressures and new initiative needs, and were developing options around expenditure reduction and income generation for future consideration by the Cabinet.
 

RESOLVED -
 

That the projected position for 2002-2003 expenditure be noted and that Officers continue to refine options for dealing with pressures.
 

8.

GENERAL FUND CAPITAL
 

The following decisions had been taken by the Cabinet on 9th October, 2001:-
 

(a)

To adopt the revised capital programme as submitted.
 

(b)

To note the position on future resources.
 

(c)

To agree the schemes that should remain on the shopping list of schemes.
 

(d)

To ask the Officers to reprioritise the shopping list schemes for further consideration at a future meeting of the Cabinet.
 

The reasons for these decisions were:-
 

(a)

to set a revised capital budget which recognised the likely level of resources that would be available, and
 

(b)

to facilitate planning for the effective use of those resources.
 

The decisions had subsequently been called in for review by the Scrutiny Committee - Resources and Customer Care on the basis that neither the papers presented to the Cabinet nor the discussion at the last meeting gave any indication as to why some items were to be removed from the shopping list and others were to be retained.
 

The Scrutiny Committee had met on 30th October, 2001 when it had been decided:-
 

(a)

That the Cabinet should be advised that the Committee wished the Vale Park Improvement Scheme to be included in the list of schemes for prioritisation, and together with the Civic Centre Improvement Scheme, should be considered in the context of any development proposals for Sites A & B.
 

(b)

That any future report should contain more detail of individual schemes and if costings were to be included, these should be as up to date as possible.
 

At the invitation of the Cabinet, the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee attended the meeting and elaborated on the issues discussed by the Committee.
 

Members were, however, concerned to make it clear that although the redevelopment proposals for sites A and B should have regard to plans relating to Vale Park, and, indeed the wider area there was no intention to pursue with potential developers any funding for the Vale Park scheme.  Accordingly it was
 

RESOLVED -
 

(1)

That the previous Cabinet decisions be affirmed with the following changes having regard to the views expressed by the Scrutiny Committee:-
 

(a)

That the Vale Park improvement scheme be included in the list of schemes for prioritisation.
 

(b)

That the development proposals for sites A and B should have regard to proposals for this particular part of the town.
 

(c)

That the Civic Centre improvement scheme should be considered within the context of any development proposals for sites A and B.
 

(2)

That it be acknowledged that any future report to Cabinet should contain more details about individual schemes, and that if costings were to be included, these should be as up to date as possible.