Agenda item

To consider the recommendations of Cabinet from its meeting on 16^th February 2010.

 

Appendix A and A (i) are exempt papers which are for information purposes and can be found at the back of the Agenda.

(Councillors June Ashworth, Eileen Blamire, Susie Charles, Melanie Forrest, Stuart Langhorn, Sylvia Rogerson, Ron Sands and Maia Whitelegg declared prejudicial interests and Councillors Chapman, Heath, Kirkman and Thomas declared personal interests in that part of the following item which related to the funding of the Dukes Theatre.)

 

The Mayor called on the Leader, Councillor Stuart Langhorn to introduce the Cabinet’s Budget and Policy Framework report comprising the current year’s revised budget, Cabinet proposals for the General Fund Revenue Budget and Capital Programme as well as the Medium Term Financial Strategy and Prudential Indicators.

 

He reminded Members that some of the supporting papers included in the agenda and the supplementary reports circulated at the meeting contained exempt information and should anyone wish to refer to the content of these it would be necessary to pass a resolution to exclude the press and public.

 

The Leader then set out the Cabinet budget proposals in some detail and answered a number of questions on the report. 

 

Referring to doubts which had been expressed over the recent decision of Cabinet in respect of Lancaster Market Hall, the proposals put forward by the market tenants and the public opinion in evidence at the meeting, Councillor Langhorn moved an additional recommendation alongside those included in the report which he hoped would allow for alternative proposals for the Market Hall to be reconsidered and brought back to Council before the end of the month, as follows:

 

6 (i)      That Council defers the decision on Lancaster Market and refers it back to Cabinet for urgent decision.

 

   (ii)     That a working group of Cabinet Members nominated by the Leader and reporting to Cabinet, be established to consider all the options available on the market and the business plan from the Market traders.  (Options should be assessed in terms of risk to the Council, sustainability and value for money for the taxpayer.  Cabinet Members should consider the business plan from the existing Market traders, the alternative of a single storey market, alternative market sites and the single trader option.  The working group should be requested to invite evidence from existing market traders, the National Federation of Market Traders and the Chamber of Commerce.)  Cabinet should make a report and recommendations to a Special Council Meeting before the 31 March 2010.

 

 Rationale:

 

Council desires a thriving market in Lancaster.  This will allow Cabinet to carefully consider this issue in the context of the recent proposal from the Market traders and involve those who wish to make a contribution.  It will allow for all alternatives to be tested before being brought for debate at full Council.’

 

He also moved recommendations (1) to (5) as set out in report, with (2) to (4) being amended to take into account (6) above.

 

The recommendations, including (6) above were seconded by Councillor Ashworth.

 

Councillor Barry then moved the following amendments to recommendation (6):

 

(1)        That the words ‘protecting local businesses’ be added after ‘sustainability in (ii),

 

(2)        That the National Association of British Market Authorities be added to the list of consultees in (ii), and

(3)        That the rationale be formally included as point (i) of the recommendation, with the word ‘indoor’ inserted after ‘thriving’.

 

With the agreement of the meeting and his seconder, Councillor Langhorn accepted this as a friendly amendment.

 

It was then moved by Councillor Mace and seconded by Councillor Charles, by way of amendment to the proposition:

 

‘That Council

 

(1)               notes that Lancaster Market is a vital part of the fabric of the town, but that the deficit arising from its operation is currently about 6% of the District's Council Tax revenue

 

(2)               notes that the current level of deficit is unsustainable, and not good value for the Council Tax payers in the district

 

(3)               notes the need to reduce or eliminate this deficit

 

(4)               resolves that a  final Council decision on  any budgetary implications outside the budget and policy framework be deferred  in order to provide time for the Lancaster Market Tenants Association to make their own proposals for the reduction of the deficit for example by paying a full rent and running the market themselves and for negotiation on their proposals to take place, leading to a further report to Council  by 31 March 2010 for possible implementation not later than 31 March 2011

 

(5)               resolves that no offer be made to an incoming single trader for either the ground floor alone or for the whole building unless such offer includes safeguards to protect council tax payers against the possibility of default or early termination of any new lease. 

 

(6)               approves recommendations 2 to 4 on page 10 of the agenda "as amended" for the above.’ 

 

There followed a lengthy debate at the conclusion of which a recorded vote was requested in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19.4.  The votes were recorded as follows:

 

For the amendment:

Councillors Susan Bray, Ken Brown, Susie Charles, Sarah Fishwick, Charles Grattan, Helen Helme, Val Histed, Tony Johnson, Roger Mace, Sylvia Rogerson, Keith Sowden, Malcolm Thomas, Peter Williamson and Paul Woodruff. (14)

 

Against the amendment:

Councillors Evelyn Archer, June Ashworth, John Barnes, Jon Barry, Eileen Blamire, Abbott Bryning, Keith Budden, Shirley Burns, Anne Chapman, Tina Clifford, Chris Coates, John Day, Roger Dennison, Jean Dent, Sheila Denwood, Jane Fletcher, Melanie Forrest, Rebekah Gerrard, John Gilbert, Mike Greenall, Janice Hanson, Emily Heath, Andrew Kay, Janie Kirkman, Stuart Langhorn, Karen Leytham, Ian McCulloch, Roger Plumb, Joyce Pritchard, Robert Redfern, Bob Roe, Ron Sands, Roger Sherlock, Joyce Taylor, Jude Towers, Morgwn Trolinger, Tony Wade, John Whitelegg and Maia Whitelegg. (39)

 

Abstention:

Councillors Peter Robinson. (1)

 

14 Members having voted for the motion, 39 against and 1 abstention, the Mayor declared the amendment lost.

 

(At this point Councillors June Ashworth, Eileen Blamire, Susie Charles, Melanie Forrest, Stuart Langhorn, Sylvia Rogerson, Ron Sands and Maia Whitelegg left the meeting for the duration of the debate and voting on the next amendment, having declared a prejudicial interest in relation to the Dukes Theatre.)

 

It was then moved by Councillor Clifford and seconded by Councillor Redfern by way of an amendment:

 

‘That the proposed budget summarised at Appendix B to the report be amended to include the reinstatement of the earlier cut of £20k grant funding to the Dukes Board as a one off in 2010/11 to be funded from the £120k contribution to General Fund Balances.’

 

In supporting this amendment, Councillor Barry suggested that a further reinstatement of £12k grant funding to the Dukes Board could be accommodated in years 2011/12 and 2012/13.

 

With the approval of the meeting and her seconder, Councillor Clifford agreed to alter her amendment in this way.

 

There followed a lengthy debate at the conclusion of which a recorded vote was requested in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19.4.   The request however failed, there being only 5 Members of Council standing to signify their support for this request.

 

On being put to the vote, 20 Members voted for the amendment, 17 against and 3 abstained, whereupon the Mayor declared the amendment carried.

 

(Those Members who had declared a prejudicial interest in the Dukes Theatre then returned to the meeting)

 

It was then moved by Councillor Clifford and seconded by Councillor Redfern, by way of further amendment:

 

‘That the proposed budget summarised at Appendix B to the report be amended to include:

 

(a)    an additional £40k for playground improvements in 2010/11, and

(b)    an additional £30k towards the running costs of the second quick response vehicle in 2010/11;

 

both to be funded from the  £120k contribution to General Fund Balances.’

 

At the suggestion of Councillor Barry, and with the approval of the meeting and her seconder, Councillor Clifford agreed to alter her amendment to fund (a) above from the Renewals Reserve.

 

On being put to the vote the Mayor declared the amendment clearly carried.

 

He then called for a vote on the substantive motion as amended when a recorded vote was requested in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19.4.  The votes were recorded as follows:

 

For the motion:

Councillors Evelyn Archer, June Ashworth, John Barnes, Jon Barry, Eileen Blamire, Abbott Bryning, Shirley Burns, Anne Chapman, Tina Clifford, Roger Dennison, Sheila Denwood, Jane Fletcher, Melanie Forrest, Rebekah Gerrard, John Gilbert, Mike Greenall, Emily Heath, Andrew Kay, Janie Kirkman, Stuart Langhorn, Ian McCulloch, Roger Plumb, Joyce Pritchard, Robert Redfern, Ron Sands, Roger Sherlock, Jude Towers, Morgwn Trolinger, John Whitelegg and Maia Whitelegg. (30)

 

Against the motion:

Councillors Susan Bray, Ken Brown, Keith Budden, Susie Charles, Jean Dent, Sarah Fishwick, Helen Helme, Tony Johnson, Roger Mace, Peter Robinson, Bob Roe, Sylvia Rogerson, Keith Sowden, Malcolm Thomas and Paul Woodruff. (15)

 

Abstentions:

Councillors Chris Coates (1)

 

30 Members having voted for the motion, 15 against and 1 abstention, the Mayor declared the motion, carried as amended.

 

Resolved:

 

(1)               That the City Council’s 2009/10 Revised Budget of £24.046M be approved, with the net overspending of £47K being met from Balances.

 

(2)               That the City Council’s 2010/11 General Fund Revenue Budget of £24.740M be approved, together with the supporting proposals as set out in Appendices B to E in the report, subject to the following amendments and taking account of the decision in (6) below, as set out in the updated supporting proposals in Appendix B to the minutes:

 

(a)   the reinstatement of the earlier cut of £20k grant funding to the Dukes Theatre as a one off for 2010/11 to be funded from the £120k contribution to General Fund Balances

 

(b)   the inclusion of an additional £12k grant funding to the Dukes Theatre in 2011/12 and 2012/13.

 

(c)   an additional £40k for playground improvements in 2010/11 to be funded from the Renewals Reserve.

 

(d)   an additional £30k towards the running costs of the second quick response vehicle in 2010/11 to be funded from the £120k contribution to General Fund Balances

 

(3)               That the Medium Term Financial Strategy covering both revenue and capital investment, and as set out at Appendix F to the report, be approved, as updated by decisions made in (2) above and (6) below.

 

(4)               That the Capital Programme as set out at Appendix G to the report be approved, subject to amendment to take account of the decision in (6) below and as set out in the updated Appendix C to the minutes, together with the supporting Prudential Indicators at Appendix H to the report as updated by decisions made in (2) above and (6) below.

 

(5)               That Council notes the Section 151 Officer’s advice regarding robustness of budget estimates, the adequacy of reserves and balances and the affordability of borrowing.

 

(6)               That in relation to Lancaster Market

 

(a)               Council desires a thriving indoor market in Lancaster, and wishes to allow Cabinet to carefully consider this issue in the context of the recent proposal from the Market traders and involve those who wish to make a contribution, enabling all alternatives to be tested before being brought for debate at full Council.

 

(b)               Council therefore defers its decision on Lancaster Market and refers it back to Cabinet for urgent decision.

 

(c)               A working group of Cabinet Members nominated by the Leader and reporting to Cabinet, be established to consider all the options available on the market and the business plan from the Market traders.  (Options should be assessed in terms of risk to the Council, sustainability, protecting local businesses and value for money for the taxpayer.  Cabinet Members should consider the business plan from the existing Market traders, the alternative of a single storey market, alternative market sites and the single trader option.  The working group should be requested to invite evidence from existing market traders, the National Federation of Market Traders, National Association of British Market Authorities and the Chamber of Commerce.)  Cabinet should make a report and recommendations to a Special Council Meeting before the 31 March 2010.

 

At this point, with the agreement of the meeting, the Mayor adjourned

for a 25 minute break.

 

Council reconvened at 8.30pm.