To receive any Members' questions.
Minutes:
Councillor Mrs M H Goldspink asked the Leader of the Council what the Council’s policy was on the sending of first or second class mail if the letters were not of an urgent nature and how the policy was monitored.
In reply, the Leader stated that, as a matter of course, second class mail was used, except for urgent items where first class postage would be used. Advice had been issued reminding Officers that communications with Members, the County and Town Councils should be sent via the courier service. He invited Members to notify Officers if they became aware of any misuse.
In response to a supplementary question on whether a written procedure existed, the Leader stated that the cost of monitoring needed to be balanced against the scale of any problems. There had been very few occasions requiring any monitoring as there had not been any problems.
Councillor J O Ranger asked the Leader of the Council if he agreed that with Council’s need to cut or restrict some services or increase costs during the next four years, Council should be very open about this and give maximum publicity to the necessary changes and clear reasons why. He further asked if the Leader also agreed that all Councillors, irrespective of party or of no party, should be fully supportive of the actions the Council had to take, even if they were likely to be unpopular with the public.
In response, the Leader agreed that the difficult times ahead were unprecedented and Council was faced with making challenging decisions. These would include some tough choices that Council might not prefer to make, but would be for the greater good. It would be necessary to help residents understand the rationale for some decisions that might involve increased charges, but would be necessary for ensuring that Council’s finances remained sustainable over the medium term.
The Leader accepted that some Members might wish to articulate a philosophical difference on some matters. However, he was confident that all Members, from time to time, would support challenging decisions proposed by his Administration.
Councillor A M Graham asked the Executive Member for Community Development, Leisure and Culture if she could confirm that the vacancy of the Arts Development Officer had been advertised and if not, when it would be.
In reply, the Executive Member confirmed that the post had not been advertised. Officers were reviewing the options available within the wider context of arts development and the Hertford Theatre project, which would include developing partnership working with external players and collaboration, for instance, with schools.
In response to a supplementary question on whether external groups would be consulted to ensure stability and continuity so that the investment in the arts to date was not lost, the Executive Member stated that Officers were still working through a number of ideas and that consultation with key players would take place.
Councillor A M Graham asked the Executive Member for Community Development, Leisure and Culture if she could confirm or explain if the arts development budget had been cut and whether cuts or savings were being considered by Officers in this area.
In reply, the Executive Member stated that a £5k reduction had been approved by Council for 2009/10 with a further £5k reduction being brought forward in 2010/11. This additional reduction would have no impact on the overall arts programme as the Green Heart project with the Arts Council had come to an end. Officers were looking at options for providing more from within current budgets.
In response to a supplementary question on whether the reductions could be reviewed, the Executive Member referred to her answer to the next question.
Councillor A M Graham asked the Executive Member for Community Development, Leisure and Culture if she could update the Council on whether the Hertford Theatre capital project was on target and that the timeline was on schedule and if not, what were the implications financially to Council.
In reply, the Executive Member stated that the Hertford Theatre project was on schedule. Some savings had been made and some additional expenditure had been incurred. However, the final balance had yet to be quantified.
The Executive Member advised that pantomime sales were going well and that the new website was now up and running. She also referred to the pantomime that Members would be invited to on 12 December 2010.
Finally, the Executive Member commented that Members were aware of her involvement in the arts and that, in these challenging times, Members would have to make difficult decisions. It would be important to look at arts provision in a different way.
Councillor M Wood asked the Executive Member for Resources and Internal Support if he could advise on how much was spent on consultant fees in the financial year 2009/10 and for comparative reasons 2008/9.
In response, the Executive Member for Resources and Internal Support detailed expenditure on consultant fees under six broad headings, which for 2009/10 totalled £452k, compared to £407k in 2008/09.
Councillor Wood congratulated Council for reducing expenditure from £1.4m four years ago when he had first asked the question.
Councillor Mrs M H Goldspink asked the Executive Member for Planning Policy and Transport if, in reference to Bishop’s Stortford Market, he could give his assurance that no market trader, who currently had a stall in South Street, would be compelled to move to North Street in the future, if that was against his/her wishes.
In reply, the Executive Member offered no guarantees to any market traders in any market. He commented that sometimes it was necessary for traders to move, for instance, for safety reasons or if road works were being carried out. He was aware of a request that had been made by a South Street trader. However, no decision had yet been taken to move traders to North Street. He reminded Members that East Herts Council held the market rights and was entitled to seek to move traders if this benefitted the town centre.
Councillor Mrs M H Goldspink asked the Executive Member for Planning Policy and Transport if he could detail how many shopkeepers and retailers in South Street, Bishop’s Stortford were consulted about the proposals to move the market to North Street and if there was a written record of their comments.
In response, the Executive Member stated that Officers had consulted widely with the promotion of the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) and had received support from the Chamber of Commerce, the Town Council and Town Partnership. All businesses had received a mailshot from Mouchel and there had been no objections and so no written record. There had not been any consultation on moving the market as no decision had been taken.
In reply to a supplementary question on whether the consultation was only about the TRO or had included questions on moving market traders, the Executive Member undertook to provide a written response.
Councillor Mrs M H Goldspink asked the Executive Member for Planning Policy and Transport if the market traders in Bishop’s Stortford had been asked for their ideas on improving the market and, if so, was there any written record of meetings and ideas.
In reply, the Executive Member referred to two questionnaires in 2007 that had formed the basis of the current plans. These had addressed various issues, such as car parking, advertising, market layout, etc, and there had been a consensus for pedestrianisation of the market areas on market days and consolidation of the market around Potter Street/Market Square/North Street. The Market Manager had spoken to traders on a weekly basis and had kept them informed of progress. Traders were aware of the plans seeking more focus on Market Square/North Street, which would be the priority location for future requests for stalls.
Councillor V Shaw asked the Executive Member for Planning Policy and Transport if he could explain, for the sake of transparency and acceptable practice, why the Markets Task and Finish Group did not have sight of the grant application for the move of the market in Bishop’s Stortford and why the £47,000 for that move came from the Town Enhancement Budget.
In reply, the Executive Member commented that the Task and Finish Group had been aware of the project as recorded in the notes of meetings held on 26 January and 23 February 2010. The grant application had included bids involving wider regeneration projects, such as the pedestrianisation of North Street and improved riverside access. These elements of the bid had been successful and had required match funding of £25k from the Town Centres Enhancement budget for a project costing nearly £250k. He believed that the process had been open and transparent.
In response to a supplementary question, the Executive Member commented that the Task and Finish Group had not seen the application as this was an Officer responsibility. He would not have expected to have seen the application himself.
Councillor T Milner asked the Leader of the Council if he shared his disappointment at the recent resignation of two independent members of this Council. Mr and Mrs Clark had publicly stated they were on a "break", which might suggest that they intended to stand again in May next year. He asked the Leader, if they were to stand again, how much this couple’s "holiday" would cost the taxpayers of East Herts.
In reply, the Leader confirmed that he did share in Councillor Milner’s disappointment. He commented that if the use of the word “break” did mean that they would stand again in May 2011, then they would be morally bankrupt. He was aware of one by-election and potentially two. If the by-elections were held on the same day, this would cost £16k.