Venue: Council Chamber, Wallfields, Hertford. View directions
Contact: Martin Ibrahim Tel: (01279) 502173 Email: martin.ibrahim@eastherts.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Treasury Management Strategy and Annual Investment Strategy 2015/16 PDF 136 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: The Executive considered a report setting out the proposed Treasury Management Strategy, Annual Investment Strategy and Prudential Indicators for 2015/16. The Leader advised that a revised Essential Reference Paper ‘C’ on the Prudential Indicators, which included the latest figures available, had been tabled.
The Audit Committee, at its meeting held on 21 January 2015, had supported the recommendations as now detailed.
The Executive supported the recommendations as now detailed.
RECOMMENDED – that (A) the Treasury Management Strategy and Annual Investment Strategy, as now submitted, be approved;
(B) the Prudential Indicators, as now submitted, be approved; and
(C) the counterparty listing, as now submitted, be approved. |
|
Consolidated Budget Report and 2015/16 – 2017/18 Medium Term Financial Strategy PDF 788 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: The Executive considered a report setting out the Council’s budget proposals for 2015/16, which included:
· the 2014/15 Revised Revenue Estimates; · the 2015/16 Revenue Budget; · the 2015/16 Schedule of Charges; · the 2014/15 (Revised) to 2017/18 Capital Programme; · the refreshed Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP); and · the Council’s Reserves.
The Leader referred to the comments of the joint meeting of Scrutiny Committees, held on 20 January 2015, and set out the Executive’s response. In respect of staffing resources within Building Control and Enforcement, the Executive supported the underlying principle and was open to any business case for additional resources coming forward for consideration, where capacity issues had been identified. The Leader reminded Members of the ongoing Building Control partnership project and that some caution was needed in this respect.
In relation to leaf clearance, the Leader reminded Members of the rationale for previous decisions and that this was not a District Council function. However, the Executive supported the principle of partnership working and was open to ideas coming forward from community groups.
In respect of freezing charges where the Council had discretion, the Executive supported this. The Executive also supported the suggestion that Scrutiny Committees in 2015/16 be asked to review charges relevant to their specific areas. The Leader stated that the suggestion relating to Hertford Theatre’s flexibility on charges was also supported by the Executive.
Finally, in respect of the use of capital funding for leisure facilities, the Executive Member for Health, Housing and Community Support undertook to ask Officers to look at this, but expressed caution, given the costs of running a swimming pool. She acknowledged the need for more sports pitches in Bishop’s Stortford but questioned the land supply for them. She referred to the need to work closely with schools to encourage them to open up their facilities for community use. The Executive Member also reminded Members of the funding that would become available from the Bishop’s Stortford North development, which would allow a complete review of leisure across Bishop’s Stortford.
A number of Members commented. In respect of leisure facilities, some Members referred to the need to expand and/or refurbish Grange Paddocks to provide a 50m pool, which could become a magnet for sporting excellence. Some believed that contrary to national trends, there was a growing demand for swimming in Bishop’s Stortford. Mention was also made of Bishop’s Stortford having the lowest number of sports pitches in Hertfordshire.
The Executive Member for Health, Housing and Community Support reiterated that the Executive would consider a business case that came forward. She agreed that Bishop’s Stortford needed more sports pitches and encouraged those Members who were school governors to push for greater community access to school pitches.
Councillor M Wood referred to the hazards caused by leaves and their impact on grass verges and gullies, and spoke of the health risks for the elderly on footways where leaves had not been cleared. The Leader reiterated that the Council could look at assisting on specific activities, but that a budget ... view the full minutes text for item 503. |
|
Apologies To receive apologies for absence. Additional documents: Minutes: An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Councillor M Tindale. |
|
Leader's Announcements Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader welcomed the press and Members to the meeting.
He reminded Members that the scheduled presentation to Members on 4 February 2015, regarding the development proposals for Bircherley Green, Hertford had been cancelledat the request of the developer. Members would be advised if any further date was arranged for this particular presentation. |
|
To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 January 2015. Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED – that the Minutes of the Executive meeting held on 6 January 2015, be approved as a correct record and signed by the Leader. |
|
Issues Arising from Scrutiny PDF 117 KB Report to follow. Additional documents: Minutes: The Executive received a report detailing those issues referred to it by the Scrutiny Committees, which were noted. Issues relating to specific reports for the Executive were considered and detailed at the relevant report of the Executive Member.
RESOLVED – that the report be received. |
|
Bishop's Stortford Neighbourhood Plan - Silverleys and Meads Wards PDF 180 KB Additional documents:
Decision: That (A) the recommendations and modifications made by the Independent Examiner of the Bishop’s Stortford Neighbourhood Plan for Silverleys and Meads Wards, as detailed at Essential Reference Paper ‘C’ to this report, be accepted; and
(B) Officers be requested to make the necessary arrangements to hold a Neighbourhood Plan Referendum for Silverleys and Meads Wards. Minutes: The Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport submitted a report detailing the outcome of the Independent Examiner’s report into the Bishop’s Stortford Neighbourhood Plan and proposing a referendum.
The Executive noted that the Independent Examiner had recommended that the Plan should proceed to a referendum subject to minor modifications, which ensured that relevant criteria had been met. The Executive Member thanked Members and the public in Bishop’s Stortford for their hard work to date. Councillor G Jones referred to the work of the neighbourhood planning team and the need to avoid complacency in the referendum.
The Executive approved the proposals as now detailed.
RESOLVED - that (A) the recommendations and modifications made by the Independent Examiner of the Bishop’s Stortford Neighbourhood Plan for Silverleys and Meads Wards, as detailed at Essential Reference Paper ‘C’ to this report, be accepted; and
(B) Officers be requested to make the necessary arrangements to hold a Neighbourhood Plan Referendum for Silverleys and Meads Wards. |
|
Review of Resident Permit Parking Scheme Charges PDF 134 KB Additional documents:
Decision: That (A) the current financial status of the Council’s resident permit parking schemes be noted;
(B) the charging principles advocated for 2015/16 be endorsed, subject to a further review during that year;
(C) support for a freeze to permit charges in 2015/16 be confirmed; and
(D) Environment Scrutiny Committee be requested to consider and make recommendations on the criteria against which existing resident parking schemes and requests for new schemes can be assessed. Minutes: The Executive Member for Economic Development submitted a report on resident parking permit charges. He explained the current financial position, which showed that the current schemes had operated at a net deficit of £34k in 2013/14.
He advised that requests from residents for new schemes were being received and that the Council needed clear charging principles in order to be able to assess new schemes coming forward. He proposed that Environment Scrutiny Committee be asked to consider the criteria against which requests for new schemes could be assessed.
The Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport suggested that existing schemes also be included in the scrutiny review, which was supported.
In response to comments about the impact of displaced parking on areas just outside of resident schemes and the ability of the elderly to pay for visitors’ permits, the Executive Member for Economic Development commented that these would be factors, among others, for the review to consider whether a scheme should be implemented and how.
The Executive approved the proposals as now detailed.
RESOLVED - that (A) the current financial status of the Council’s resident permit parking schemes be noted;
(B) the charging principles advocated for 2015/16 be endorsed, subject to a further review during that year;
(C) support for a freeze to permit charges in 2015/16 be confirmed; and
(D) Environment Scrutiny Committee be requested to consider and make recommendations on the criteria against which existing resident parking schemes and requests for new schemes can be assessed. |
|
Planning Peer Challenge PDF 118 KB Report to follow. Additional documents:
Decision: That (A) the content of the report be noted;
(B) the action plan, as detailed at Essential Reference Paper ‘C’ of the report submitted, be approved; and
(C) the Executive Member for Community and Partnership Liaison, in conjunction with Officers, be requested to develop the detail of the action plan in (B) above. Minutes: The Leader of the Council submitted a report providing details of the Planning Peer Challenge and an action plan to implement the proposed recommendations. Given the timescales involved going beyond the elections in May 2015, the Leader advised that he had asked the Executive Member for Community and Partnership Liaison to oversee the implementation of the action plan recommendations.
In response to Members’ comments, the Leader acknowledged that the action plan needed further development and invited Members to advise the Executive Member for Community and Partnership Liaison of any gaps identified.
Members commented on various issues identified within the Peer Challenge, including Member/Officer relationships, the quality of highways advice and whether the Development Management portfolio holder should be a member of the Development Management Committee. The Leader responded to these points and looked forward to the development of the action plan.
The Executive approved the recommendations as now detailed.
RESOLVED - that (A) the content of the report be noted;
(B) the action plan, as detailed at Essential Reference Paper ‘C’ of the report submitted, be approved; and
(C) the Executive Member for Community and Partnership Liaison, in conjunction with Officers, be requested to develop the detail of the action plan in (B) above. |
|
Monthly Corporate Healthcheck - December 2014 PDF 194 KB Report to follow. Additional documents:
Decision: That (A) the budgetary variances set out in paragraph 2.1 and the forecast outturn position in paragraph 3.4 of the report submitted be noted;
(B) the current position and action proposed to address seven performance indicators that are currently off target be noted; and
(C) the risk controls, as detailed at paragraph 6.1 of the report submitted, be approved. Minutes: The Leader of the Council submitted an exception report on finance, performance and risk monitoring for December 2014.
In respect of the use of the RingGo scheme, the Executive Member for Economic Development assured Members that the needs of the elderly would be taken account of.
The Executive approved the recommendations as now detailed.
RESOLVED - that (A) the budgetary variances set out in paragraph 2.1 and the forecast outturn position in paragraph 3.4 of the report submitted be noted;
(B) the current position and action proposed to address seven performance indicators that are currently off target be noted; and
(C) the risk controls, as detailed at paragraph 6.1 of the report submitted, be approved. |