Agenda and minutes

To receive as a correct record the minutes of Cabinet held on Tuesday, 4 November 2014 (previously circulated). 

The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 4 November 2014 were approved as a correct record.

The Chairman advised that there were no items of urgent business.

No declarations were made at this point.

Members were advised that there had been 4 requests to speak at the meeting from members of the public in accordance with Cabinet’s agreed procedure, as set out in Cabinet Procedure Rule 2.7.  Karen Chaplin and Andrew Kenyon had registered to speak on the Charter Market Review (Minute 62), with Helen Hicks and Rachel-Ann Powers having requested to speak on the Storey – Tasting Garden (Minute 63 refers).

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Barry)

Report of Chief Officer (Environment)

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Barry)

Karen Chaplin and Andrew Kenyon who had registered to speak in accordance with the City Council’s agreed procedure and Cabinet Procedure Rule 2.7 addressed the meeting on this item and responded to questions raised by Cabinet Members.

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Environment) which provided options for the layout of the market once the Square Routes work has been completed. 

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

Is a more radical overhaul of the Charter Market required than what officers have consulted on?

                      Some have suggested that the Council lacks a well thought out business plan and strategy for the market, and that without one the full potential of the city centre will not be realised and furthermore decisions cannot really be taken on the layout of the market. In putting forward this view it is suggested that a key point to consider is whether the newly refurbished Market Square should be left solely for entertainment / events and for people to congregate.  The officer view of this is that actually the City Council is very clear in its view of the market. These have been articulated via the considerations made in arriving at the Square Routes project and the subsequent consultations and are underpinned by the Council’s ethos and particularly the need for the Council to act as a steward. The Council’s view of the market can be summed up as-

The market is an attraction that makes the city centre an attractive and vibrant place and should be managed to take account of other users and to make sure it achieves high standards.

The question is then to what extent does the Council feel it needs to further ‘plan’ the market to achieve the above?

The Council could take the view that to achieve the above it wants to completely overhaul the market. Some Councils have adopted a very interventionist route to market provision. To the extreme where the market is effectively an outdoor shopping mall with homogenised stalls selling prescribed products that complement what the shop based businesses offer. Other Councils have followed a less extreme route but have in place a very prescribed plan for their markets nonetheless. Such plans are still very interventionist in that they will specify which goods can be sold and from which pitches, where the goods should come from, the Council may also supply the stalls.

It would also be perfectly valid for the Council to take the view, as it has to date, that, as it is, the market supports the Council’s strategic objectives. The current model of market provision is financially self –sufficient, creating no burden for the Council tax- payer and making a contribution to delivery of key Council priorities. The ongoing management input from the Council is streamlined to keep down costs and is focussed on day to day management activities that ensure that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

(Report of Chief Officer (Environment)

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

Helen Hicks and Rachel-Ann Powers who had registered to speak in accordance with the City Council’s agreed procedure and Cabinet Procedure Rule 2.7 addressed the meeting on this item and responded to questions raised by Cabinet Members.

At this point Councillor Barry declared an interest in view of his involvement with the Friends of the Storey Gardens.

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Environment) which sought a decision on the future of the tasting garden.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

OPTION 1- Consider that restoration of the artwork is a priority for the Council and that in its role as a steward the Council should properly lead on it.

In order to arrive at this option Cabinet would need consider the following-

·       What actual evidence is there that this is generally what our citizens want?

·      How would the restoration be funded?  If the Council was to allocate resources for the Garden, in effect they would need to be redirected from another initiative or activity.  Realistically, therefore, it could be viewed that the Council does not have the resources to directly fund restoration and if so, external funds would need to be raised. We have been told that there are likely to be funds available out there. Experience tells us that obtaining external funding can be a complicated and time consuming exercise, depending on the regime under which funding is being sought, and match funding may well be required.

· How would the project be resourced? As stated above just raising the funds could be time consuming and complicated. Due to the need to prioritise and focus on core activities the Council does not have available officer time or expertise that could be allocated to this, if such a route was chosen. Therefore, Cabinet would need to consider this as an area for growth, as appropriate.

· How would the restored project be maintained? The ongoing maintenance of the artwork would be intensive and would again require ongoing growth – this need is a very real difficulty given the financial outlook.

· Even if funds are available obtaining them could take a number of years, depending on the route chosen, and in any event the timescales would not fit with the review of the Storey operation, required by 2017/18. What does the Council do with the garden in the interim and how will that support the Storey business plan?  What about the future?  What would need to change?

OPTION 2- Consider that restoration of the artwork is a  priority for the Council, but only on the firm basis that it was resource- and risk- free for the authority, and so could only take place if full responsibility could be transferred, in some way, to a third party.

In order to arrive at this option Cabinet would need to consider the following-

· The Council are properly stewards of the garden. How  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

The meeting adjourned at 11.35am and reconvened at 11.45am.

(Cabinet Members with Special Responsibility Councillors Leytham and Smith)

Report of Chief Officer (Health & Housing)

(Cabinet Members with Special Responsibility Councillors Leytham and Smith)

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Health and Housing) which sought approval to introduce a voluntary code of no smoking within children’s play areas and young people’s play facilities located in parks and open spaces owned by the Council.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

Option 1 – The introduction of a voluntary no smoking code is entirely consistent with the Council’s health and wellbeing corporate priority and can be achieved with minimum impact on Council resources.

Councillor Leytham proposed, seconded by Councillor David Smith:-

“That the recommendation, as set out in the report, be approved.”

Councillors then voted:-

Resolved:

(7 Members (Councillors Blamire, Bryning, Hamilton-Cox, Hanson, Leytham, Sands and Smith) voted in favour, and 1 Member (Councillor Barry) abstained.)

(1)             That the introduction of a voluntary code of no smoking within Council owned play areas, skate parks and multi-use play areas be approved.

Officer responsible for effecting the decision:

Chief Officer (Health and Housing)

Reasons for making the decision:

Reducing child exposure to smoking and de-normalising tobacco use within the community is desirable to try to reduce smoking uptake rates amongst young people.  Smoking is still a major public health problem and implementing a voluntary code of no smoking in play areas is one way of the Council contributing to addressing the health, social and financial impacts of smoking.  In addition, smoking related litter should reduce in play areas and this also addresses another important priority of the Council.

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Bryning)

Report of Chief Officer (Resources)

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Bryning)

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Resources) which presented the corporate performance and financial monitoring reports at quarter 2 of the 2014/15 performance monitoring cycle.

Following the approval of the Corporate Plan on 16 July 2014, Officers have been developing the performance monitoring process to ensure the ‘right’ measures are in place and that they can be measured accurately and appropriately.  Planned performance reporting in Quarter 2 has been deferred in light of a revised performance management framework currently being developed and actions arising from a recent Investors in People assessment.  The report therefore focussed on financial, property and treasury management activities.

The second quarter’s update on Property matters was included at Appendix B to the report,and the position with regards to treasury management activities was included at Appendix C to the report.

Councillor Bryning proposed, seconded by Councillor Barry:

“That the recommendations as set out in the report be approved.”

Resolved unanimously:

(1)          That the report be noted.

(2)          That the Treasury Management report, as set out at Appendix C to the report, be referred on to Council for noting.

Officer responsible for effecting the decision:

Chief Officer (Resources)

Reasons for making the decision:

The Council’s Performance Management Framework requires the regular reporting of operational, as well as financial performance.

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Bryning)

Report of Chief Officer (Resources)

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Bryning)

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Resources) which provided an update on the Council’s financial position to help inform development of Cabinet’s budget proposals.  Given that the Local Government Settlement had not yet been received, the report was an interim update only, primarily for information and no specific options were put forward.

Councillor Bryning proposed, seconded by Councillor Sands:-

“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”

Councillors then voted:-

Resolved unanimously:

(1)          That Cabinet notes the draft budgetary position for current and future years as set out in the report, accepting that this is an interim update.

(2)         That the update be referred on to December Council for information.

Officer responsible for effecting the decision:

Chief Officer (Resources)

Reasons for making the decision:

To note the latest position and to provide an update to full Council. 

This is to give further notice in accordance with Part 2, paragraph 5 (4) and 5 (5) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 of the intention to take the following item(s) in private. 

Cabinet is recommended to pass the following recommendation in relation to the following item(s):- 

“That, in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business, on the grounds that they could involve the possible disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of that Act.” 

Members are reminded that, whilst the following item(s) have been marked as exempt, it is for Cabinet itself to decide whether or not to consider each of them in private or in public.  In making the decision, Members should consider the relevant paragraph of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, and also whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.  In considering their discretion Members should also be mindful of the advice of Council Officers. 

It was moved by Councillor David Smith and seconded by Councillor Leytham:-

“That, in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business, on the grounds that it could involve the possible disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of that Act.”

Members then voted as follows:-

(6 Members (Councillors Blamire, Bryning, Hanson, Leytham, Sands and Smith) voted in favour and 2 Members (Councillors Barry and Hamilton-Cox) voted against.)

Resolved:

(1)        That, in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business, on the grounds that it could involve the possible disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of that Act. 

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)

Joint Report of Chief Officer (Regeneration and Planning) and Chief Officer (Resources)

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)

Cabinet received a joint report from the Chief Officer (Regeneration and Planning) and Chief Officer (Resources) to approve the freehold and leasehold disposal of the land south of Bailrigg Lane, Lancaster (the ‘Science Park’ site).  The report was exempt from publication by virtue of Paragraph 3, of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the exempt report.

Councillor Hanson proposed, seconded by Councillor Bryning:-

“That the recommendation, as set out in the exempt report, be approved.”

Councillors then voted:-

Resolved:

(6 Members (Councillors Blamire, Bryning, Hanson, Leytham, Sands and Smith) voted in favour and 2 Members (Councillors Barry and Hamilton-Cox) abstained).

(1)          That the land south of Bailrigg Lane, Lancaster, as shown edged red and coloured blue on the plan attached,  be disposed of on the terms and conditions as set out in section 2 of the exempt report.

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

Chief Officer (Resources)

Chief Officer (Regeneration and Planning)

Reasons for making the decision

The Lancaster Science Park (or Innovation campus) is a long-standing regeneration priority of the Council and is identified as such in the Local Development Framework Core Strategy. 

The Council’s acquisition of the land was funded by the former North West Development Agency (NWDA) to facilitate specifically the Science Park idea.  This places significant restrictions and obligations on the Council in terms of its disposal of the land and also on the future use and development of the site.

Furthermore, the Corporate Property Strategy requires that the Council review its asset base and only retain those assets required to meet its agreed objectives and priorities.  Where assets are not required for this purpose, generally they should be disposed of at best value.  This sale allows the Council to improve the management of its assets