Agenda and minutes

At this point, Members are asked to declare:

·        any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests

·        any prejudicial interests or

·        any disclosable pecuniary interests

which they may have in respect of business on this agenda.

Members were invited to declare at this point in the meeting any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests, any prejudicial interests or any disclosable pecuniary interests they might have in the business on the agenda.

The following personal interests were declared:

To approve and sign the minutes of the Budget Council meeting held on 27 February 2014.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the Budget Council meeting held on 27 February 2014 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

It was noted that there were no items of civic business.

At this point in the meeting, any member of the public who has registered to address the Council, or to ask a Member of the Council a question, on a matter directly relevant to the business of the Council or the City, may do so.  The deadline for registering is 5:00pm on Wednesday 26 March 2014.

To register to speak please contact the Democracy Officer for the meeting, on the details at the foot of the agenda.

WEBCASTING NOTICE

Please note: this meeting may be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the internet - at the start of the meeting the Lord Mayor will confirm if all or part of the meeting is being filmed.

You should be aware that the Council is a Data Controller under the Data Protection Act. Data collected during this webcast will be retained in accordance with the Council’s published policy.

http://www.york.gov.uk/downloads/download/3130/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_of_council_meetings

Public seating areas will not be filmed by the Council.

The Lord Mayor announced that six members of the public had registered to speak at the meeting.

Kevin Dobbin spoke in support of Councillor Reid’s motion relating to the closure of Lendal Bridge, which was due to be debated later in the meeting.  He stated that he felt aggrieved by the closure and had suffered financial detriment.  He expressed concern at the number of penalty charges that had been imposed and stated that the arrangements had been poorly implemented, ill advised and that the national media coverage had been bad for the city.  He urged that the motion be supported. 

Peter Kilbane spoke against Councillor Reid’s motion relating to the closure of Lendal Bridge, which was to be debated later in the meeting.  He outlined some of the benefits of the restrictions, including making the area a more pleasant and inviting environment.  He drew attention to the pollution caused by cars and the impact on long-term health and happiness.  He urged that the motion be rejected.

Gwen Swinburn spoke in relation to the recommendations of the Audit and Governance Committee and the report of the Chair of the Corporate and Scrutiny Management Committee.  Ms Swinburn urged that consideration be given to the Council’s consultation procedures and suggested that scrutiny of this issue be carried out.  She requested that the process for consultation on the review of the Council’s Constitution be made clear and she also expressed an interest in serving as an Independent Person on the Audit and Governance Committee.

Johnny Hayes, from Bishopthorpe Road Traders’ Association, spoke in support of the petition asking the Council to restrict

supermarket expansion in York.  Mr Hayes stated that independent shops encouraged people to shop locally and were a good resource for the community.  He gave details of the number of employees working for small businesses on Bishopthorpe Road and the income brought to the city. He stated that there were many supermarkets in York and this tended to have a detrimental impact on small businesses.  He urged that there be no further supermarkets in the city. 

Adam Sinclair spoke on behalf of York City Retailers, in support of the petition asking the Council to restrict supermarket expansion in York.  He endorsed the comments made by the previous speaker and stated that small and independent specialist businesses also attracted world class businesses that were keen to be located where there was a vibrant independent sector.  He stated that there was too much supermarket space across the city and requested that the petition be supported.

Graham Kennedy, organiser of the petition asking the Council to restrict supermarket expansion in York, stated that he owned an independent family business that employed a number of people in York.  He stated that there were already sixteen major supermarkets in York and that further supermarkets were not needed.  He stated that supermarkets created traffic problems, and resulted in job losses to local businesses.  Supermarkets also acted in the interest of their shareholders and not the local community.  He  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

To consider any petitions received from Members in accordance with Standing Order No.7.  To date, notice has been received of two petitions to be presented by:

i)             Cllr Warters to present the following petition on behalf of local residents, which is to be debated, following receipt of over 1,000 signatures, in accordance with the Council’s petitions scheme:

Restrict Supermarket Expansion in York – signed by 1441 people plus 19 online signatories (956 York residents/

505 East Riding/Selby area)

The signatories “petition the Council to:

Not approve any further planning permissions for supermarkets in York without a public debate.

We believe that York has now too many large supermarkets and any further expansion will threaten the very existence and sustainability of independent local retailers.”

[A background report is attached to the agenda at Agenda item 5 - Annex A]

ii)            Cllr Doughty on behalf of residents of Stockton on the Forest and Hopgrove calling for the reinstatement of late evening bus services from the City Centre, which were lost with the introduction of the Winter Bus timetable. 

A.   Petition – Restrict Supermarket Expansion in York – signed by 1441 people plus 19 online signatories (956 York residents/505 East Riding/Selby area)

In view of the number of signatories to the following petition asking the Council to not approve any further planning permissions for supermarkets in York without a public debate and, in accordance with the Council’s current petitions scheme, this was discussed by Members.  Consideration was also given to a background report from the Head of Development Services and Regeneration:

The signatories “petition the Council to:

Not approve any further planning permissions for supermarkets in York without a public debate.

We believe that York has now too many large supermarkets and any further expansion will threaten the very existence and sustainability of independent local retailers

Councillor Warters presented the petition.

Following the debate the Lord Mayor confirmed that the petition and debate had been noted.

B.  Petitions Presented Under Standing Order 7

Under Standing Order 7, petitions were presented by:

(i)           Councillor Doughty, on behalf of Stockton on the Forest and Hopgrove residents calling for the reinstatement of late evening bus services from the city centre. ^1.

(ii)          Councillor King, on behalf of residents of Burdyke Avenue, regarding parking in the area. ^2.

(iii)        Councillor Reid, on behalf of residents in the Dringhouses and Woodthorpe Ward, calling on the Council to improve the condition of the roads, footpaths, verges and traffic calming humps in the area, including Ryecroft Avenue, Moor Lane, Waines Road, West Thorpe, The Horseshoe and North Lane. ^3.

To receive and consider a written report from the Leader on the work of the Cabinet.

A written report was received from the Cabinet Leader, Councillor James Alexander, on the work of the Cabinet.

The Cabinet Leader offered his condolences to the family and friends of Megan Roberts and Ben Clarkson.

Thanks were expressed to Darren Richardson – Director of City and Environmental Services  and to Andrew Crookham – Principal Accountant for their services to the Council. 

A       Questions

Notice had been received of eleven questions on the written report, submitted by Members in accordance with Standing Orders.  The first three questions were put and answered as follows and Councillor Alexander undertook to provide Members with written answers to the remaining questions:

(i)      From Cllr Warters

“Can the Council Leader explain how his desire to class York as a top ten European city for economic growth by 2015 will be reconciled by the clearly expressed desire, as evidenced by the Local Plan consultation responses of existing York residents, to maintain the environment and quality of life in York by opposing the development of Green Belt land for his over enthusiastic housing targets?”

The Leader replied:

“By ensuring there is balance between protection of green spaces and new developments for homes and businesses. This has to be done in context of the needs of York and Government policy - both of which show no new developments is not an option. Without a local plan which takes into account planned growth, there is no protection of our green spaces.”

(ii)      From Cllr Steward

“With the leader wanting to know whether others are ‘in favour of rent capping’ can he outline the system he is proposing so others could at least have a chance of knowing what he is seeking their agreement to?”

The Leader replied:

“I am proposing that mechanisms are looked at to introduce rent capping in - even if on a temporary basis. This could reduce the nation's housing benefit bill and ensure funds are available for grants to kickstart stalled construction. It could also fund large amounts of social housing. Once the housing market is repaired through an increase in supply, there is a legitimate argument to question whether a rent cap is required any longer.

Administration of such a cap could be taken at a regional or sub-regional level. I personally believe that councils are too small to take on board this function and that it would be inappropriate for politicans to set rent-caps of their own electors. I would advocate a national independent body to set rent caps based on median income along combined authority or LEP geography.”

(iii)     From Cllr Aspden

“Could the Cabinet Leader explain his decision to re-join the NYYER LEP Board in February?”

The Leader replied:

“I have explained here in full council and in various speeches over the past year that what we sought was clarity over funding streams through local enterprise partnerships. It made no sense for York to have to compete against itself for fair funding on two different and potentially opposing economic plans. I  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72.

To consider the following recommendations for approval from the Audit and Governance Committee:

As Chair of the Audit and Governance Committee, Councillor Potter moved and Councillor Burton seconded the following recommendation contained in minute 64 of the Audit and Governance Committee meeting held on 12 February 2014:

“[That Council] approve the amended draft “Summary and explanation” section of the Constitution to replace section one of the current Constitution forthwith”

On being put to the vote, the recommendation was declared CARRIED and it was

Resolved:  That the above recommendation of the Audit and Governance Committee meeting held on 12 February 2014 be approved. ^1.

To consider the following recommendations for approval from the Gambling, Licensing and Regulatory Committee:

As Chair of the Gambling, Licensing and Regulatory Committee, Councillor Boyce moved and Councillor Gillies seconded the following recommendation contained in minute 20 of the Gambling, Licensing and Regulatory Committee meeting held on 17 March 2014:

“[That Council] adopt the Statement of Licensing Policy subject to the amendments detailed in minute 20”

On being put to the vote, the recommendation was declared CARRIED and it was

Resolved:  That the above recommendation of the Gambling, Licensing and Regulatory Committee meeting held on 17 March 2014 be approved. ^1.

To receive a report from Councillor Galvin, the Chair of the Corporate and Scrutiny Management Committee (CSMC), on the work of the CSMC, to be moved by the Vice Chair Councillor Runciman.

Council received the report of the Chair of the Corporate and Scrutiny Management Committee at pages 111 to 114, on the work of the Committee.

Councillor Runciman then moved and Cllr Horton seconded acceptance of the report and it was

RESOLVED:                That the scrutiny report be received and noted.

To receive a written report from the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services and to question the Cabinet Member thereon, provided any such questions are registered in accordance with the timescales and procedures set out in Standing Order 8.2.1.

Council received a written report from Councillor Levene, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services.

Notice had been received of twelve questions on the report submitted by Members in accordance with Standing Orders.  The first eight questions were put and answered as follows and Councillor Levene undertook to provide Members with written answers to the remaining questions:

(i)      From Cllr Richardson

“Regarding the planned Spring Clean, can you compare the amount of rubbish collected, in general figures, during last year’s campaign with the amount of rubbish collected annually prior to the closure of Beckfield Lane and the restricted hours at Towthorpe Recycling Centres?”

The Cabinet Member replied:

“Specific tonnages arising from the Spring Clean were not collected. However, the trend of the cost for dealing with flytipping is actually going down:

08/09                   £69.5k

09/10                   £43.3k

10/11                   £52.5k

11/12                   £44.6k

12/13                   £49.4k

Latest figures for 13/14         £31.5k”

(ii)     From Cllr Aspden

“Would the Cabinet Member agree that the fall in recycling levels is a regrettable consequence of this administration’s policies?”

The Cabinet Member replied:

“I do not agree that the change in recycling levels is a consequence of this administration’s policies.”

(iii)     From Cllr Jeffries

“Why does the Cabinet Member give such a low priority to maintaining environmental standards in the City’s sub-urban estates?”

The Cabinet Member replied:

“The City’s suburban estates are not given a low priority. Resources are deployed based on the needs of individual areas, not location, or indeed the fantasies of opposition councillors.”

(iv)    From Cllr Reid

“What performance targets have been set for the “Smarter York” team and when can we expect the new structure to provide measurable improvements in the local environment?”

The Cabinet Member replied:

“Whether it’s the almost 100 events going on as part of this year’s Spring Clean, the 32 different projects being supported across the city, or the growing number of residents and businesses signing up to the Smarter Charter, Smarter York has already made measurable improvements to the local environment.

The team is still becoming established and objectives will therefore evolve, however the primary objectives of the Smarter York officers will be around increasing the number of volunteering opportunities, publicity for those opportunities, and engagement with those opportunities.”

(v)     From Cllr Richardson

“What were the “skill gaps” which prevented staff from being able to operate the new city centre cleaning equipment and what could have been done to prepare the staff more effectively for use of the new equipment?”

The Cabinet Member replied:

“As tasks in this role have historically been mostly manual, there was not the need to posses a driving licence, as we move to the use of machinery to help us improve standards; this means a driving license is required. We are funding driving lessons where applicable.”

(vi)    From Cllr Orrell

“What additional resources are being put into the restarting of green bin collections to ensure that bins containing garden waste accumulated since October is collected within normal schedules?”

The Cabinet Member replied:

“We are confident that we will  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

To consider a report seeking approval to the Pay Policy Statement for 2014/15 relating to the pay of the Council’s senior staff, to fulfil the requirements of Sections 38 – 43 of the Localism Act 2011.

Councillor Williams, as Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Services, presented a written report detailing the Council’s Pay Policy Statement for 2014/15 relating to the pay of the Council’s senior staff, to fulfil the requirements of Sections
38-43 of the Localism Act 2011. 

Councillor Williams then moved a motion to approve the Pay Policy Statement, which was seconded by Councillor Alexander.

Resolved:  That the motion in respect of the Pay Policy Statement            for 2014/15 be approved.

Minutes of the following meetings of outside bodies, received since the last meeting of Council, have been made available for Members to view via the Council’s website at

http://democracy.york.gov.uk/mgListOutsideBodies.aspx?bcr=1

Copies may also be obtained by contacting Democratic Services at West Offices, Station Rise, York (tel. 01904 551088)

·        Yorkshire Purchasing Organisation – 31 January 2014

·        NHS – 18 September 2013

·        Fire Authority – 12 February 2014

·        Without Walls – 10 February 2014

·        Safer York – 3 February 2014

Members are invited to put any questions to the Council’s representatives on the above bodies, in accordance with Standing Order 10(b).

Minutes of the following meetings had been made available for Members to view on the Council’s website:

·        Yorkshire Purchasing Organisation – 31 January 2014

·        NHS – 18 September 2013

·        Fire Authority – 12 February 2014

·        Without Walls – 10 February 2014

·        Safer York – 3 February 2014

Notice had been received of one question in respect of the minutes, submitted by a Member in accordance with Standing Orders:

i)             To Councillor Williams as one of the Council representatives on the Yorkshire Purchasing Organisation

From Councillor Barton:

“Can Councillor Williams confirm than in a response to a question put by a local radio station, he acknowledged that as our voting delegate he had never attended a meeting of the YPO Management Committee but, in defence, had read reports from Officers who had attended all of them and was satisfied with their contents”

Councillor Williams replied:

I cannot confirm this as the quote is inaccurate.  I am happy to provide a response to Councillor Barton via email outside of the meeting. I no longer serve as a City of York Council representative on the YPO.

To consider the following Notices of Motion under Standing Order 12:

A – Motions referred from the Cabinet in accordance with Standing Order 12.1(a)

None

B – Motions submitted for consideration directly by Council, in accordance with Standing Order 12.1(b)

(i)        From Cllr Semlyen

“York Labour promised to set up an independent Fairness Commission before the last local elections. This was implemented soon after the election result. The commission was led by the Archbishop of York. A key recommendation of the commission was the introduction of the Living Wage. Under Labour this is the first local authority in Yorkshire and the Humber to commit and implement the Living Wage. This has so far helped increase the pay levels of 700 of our lowest paid staff.

The Leader of the Conservative Group has said he is “sceptical” about the Living Wage and the Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group has called the Living Wage “immoral”. York Liberal Democrats have previously published leaflets stating they would “realign staff costs to private sector rates”.

Council believes both the electorate and staff deserve to know where each of the party stands on the Living Wage over the course of the next council (2015-9). Council resolves to commit to the Living Wage for at least the course of this period.”

(ii)      From Cllr Brooks

“Council notes residents’ concerns regarding the placement of wind turbines within the council’s boundaries and acknowledges their impact on residential amenities and visual landscapes and the spatial and safety issues which arise from erecting large wind turbines in the Vale of York.  Therefore, as a key aspect of the next phase of York’s Local Plan process, the council recommends the Local Plan consults on imposing minimum distance setbacks between wind turbines and habitation as follows:

For all wind turbines of 15m in height and over (as measured from the ground to hub height), a distance of 1.5 km between the turbine and any habitation, unless all landowners or occupiers within this distance consent; and

For all wind turbines of whatever height, a distance of 350m from any public footpath or bridleway.”

(iii)     From Cllr Reid

“Council notes the report in The Press on 27th February which revealed important facts about the Lendal Bridge closure.

Council further notes that:

1.   The Labour Cabinet’s six-month trial closure of Lendal Bridge should have finished at the end of February

2.   The closure has brought widespread criticism from local residents, business owners, tourists and tourist groups

3.   Negative media and social media coverage has been generated to the detriment of our city

4.   The closure has failed to significantly improve overall bus journey times

5.   Traffic displaced by the closure has caused increased congestion elsewhere in the city e.g. Foss Islands Road and Water End at Clifton Bridge

6.   Officers have admitted that the trial closure has had little impact on overall air quality

7.   The Labour Cabinet Member responsible has admitted that the signage at the start of the trial was  ...  view the full agenda text for item 79.

(i)        Living Wage

It was moved by Councillor Semlyen and seconded by Councillor Williams that:

“York Labour promised to set up an independent Fairness Commission before the last local elections. This was implemented soon after the election result. The commission was led by the Archbishop of York. A key recommendation of the commission was the introduction of the Living Wage. Under Labour this is the first local authority in Yorkshire and the Humber to commit and implement the Living Wage. This has so far helped increase the pay levels of 700 of our lowest paid staff.

The Leader of the Conservative Group has said he is “sceptical” about the Living Wage and the Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group has called the Living Wage “immoral”. York Liberal Democrats have previously published leaflets stating they would “realign staff costs to private sector rates”.

Council believes both the electorate and staff deserve to know where each of the party stands on the Living Wage over the course of the next council (2015-9). Council resolves to commit to the Living Wage for at least the course of this period.”

On being put to the vote, the motion was declared CARRIED and it was

Resolved:  That the above motion be approved. ^1.

(ii)      Wind Turbines

It was moved by Councillor Brooks and seconded by Cllr Docherty that:

“Council notes residents’ concerns regarding the placement of wind turbines within the council’s boundaries and acknowledges their impact on residential amenities and visual landscapes and the spatial and safety issues which arise from erecting large wind turbines in the Vale of York.  Therefore, as a key aspect of the next phase of York’s Local Plan process, the council recommends the Local Plan consults on imposing minimum distance setbacks between wind turbines and habitation as follows:

For all wind turbines of 15m in height and over (as measured from the ground to hub height), a distance of 1.5 km between the turbine and any habitation, unless all landowners or occupiers within this distance consent; and

For all wind turbines of whatever height, a distance of 350m from any public footpath or bridleway.”

On being put to the vote, the motion was declared LOST and it was

Resolved:  That the above motion be not approved.

(iii)     Lendal Bridge Closure (proposed by Cllr Reid)

Council notes the report in The Press on 27th February which revealed important facts about the Lendal Bridge closure.

Council further notes that:

1.   The Labour Cabinet’s six-month trial closure of Lendal Bridge should have finished at the end of February

2.   The closure has brought widespread criticism from local residents, business owners, tourists and tourist groups

3.   Negative media and social media coverage has been generated to the detriment of our city

4.   The closure has failed to significantly improve overall bus journey times

5.   Traffic displaced by the closure has caused increased congestion elsewhere in the city e.g. Foss Islands Road and Water End at Clifton Bridge

6.   Officers have admitted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 79.

To deal with the following questions to the Cabinet Leader and / or other Cabinet Members, in accordance with Standing Order 11.3(a):

(i)        To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Steward:

“Given public scepticism about overseas trips by cabinet members can the leader give an update on the tangible results to come from these trips under his administration?

(ii)      To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Aspden:

“What is the value of the investment – detailing each development separately - made in York which can be directly attributed to the Council and its partners’ participation in the 2013 MIPIM event?”

(iii)     To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Ayre:

“At the last ordinary Council meeting held in December, the Cabinet Member for Leisure claimed that the Council Leader would answer the following question when information became available in January. Perhaps the Leader would now give us the information: Can the Cabinet Member outline how much additional income the Council can expect to receive from parking charges, rents, leases, licences, sponsorship and similar income streams during and after the ‘Grand Départ’?”

(iv)    To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Hyman:

“How many residents (excluding council officers and members) have attended each of the “community conversation” events held so far?”

(v)      To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Cuthbertson:

“What has been the cost of staging the community conversation events held so far?”

(vi)    To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Runciman

“Please could the Cabinet Leader present a list showing York’s ranking in all sections of the 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Centre for Cities: Cities Outlook reports?”

(vii)   To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Steward:

“In light of the leader’s remarks that himself and Cllr Merrett should not be personally pinpointed for the Lendal Bridge farce, who does he think should take the blame?”

(viii)  To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Ayre:

“How much has the Council spent both directly and indirectly (through partners such as the Leeds City Region) on promotional activities connected with this year’s MIPIM event held in Cannes and what benefits did this cost bring?

(ix)    To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Steward:

“Following confused messages from the Labour budget and cabinet members’ comments on ‘privatisation’ can the leader confirm whether he agrees that if the private sector can deliver an output cheaper and better than the public sector that it makes sense for it to do so?”

(x)      To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Ayre:

“ Who attended this year’s MIPIM event for the council and could the Leader provide a breakdown of costs –attendance, travel, subsistence and accommodation etc?”

(xi)    To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Steward:

“What percentage of York’s residents does the leader believe support the current closure of Lendal Bridge?”

(xii)   To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Ayre:

“Did any representatives from City of York Council attend the ‘Urbact’ event in Paris in January and if they did what the purpose of the visit, what were the costs,  ...  view the full agenda text for item 80.

Sixty three questions to the Leader and Cabinet Members had been received under Standing Order 11.3(a).  The guillotine having fallen at this point, Members agreed to receive written answers to their questions, as set out below:

(i)        To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Steward:

“Given public scepticism about overseas trips by cabinet members can the leader give an update on the tangible results to come from these trips under his administration?”

Reply:

“Firstly, it is misleading of Coun. Steward to imply that overseas trips by Cabinet Members are a common occurrence, but on rare occasions representing a global city requires international travel. It may surprise the opposition but York having a global brand is not enough. Sometimes you have to use this brand to gain tangible benefits.

In a study of the most promising investment locations in Europe, fDi Magazine (Financial Times) named York in the top ten European Cities and Regions of the Future in two categories. We placed:

·        Ninth - Small European Cities - Overall

·        Eighth - Small European Cities - FDI strategy

In addition, the following benefits have accrued from these trips:

1.   Real investor leads which have been introduced to landowners of key sites in the city, and which are keen to engage with these opportunities, such as York Central, Nestle South and the University’s Heslington East campus as and when these open to procurement of developer and/or investor partners

2.   Tour de France coming to York

3.   Global media coverage for York with regards to the Tour de France

4.   Swedish model of operating elderly persons homes (visit not paid for by the council)

5.   Tourism partnerships

6.   A renewal of our twinning with Dijon”

(ii)      To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Aspden:

“What is the value of the investment – detailing each development separately - made in York which can be directly attributed to the Council and its partners’ participation in the 2013 MIPIM event?”

Reply:

“The nature of the developments promoted at 2013 and 2014 – namely, sites including York Central, Biovale at Heslington East, Guildhall, and a strategic city deal package (which would pair some of these developments with infrastructure investment into a single package), are of a scale and complexity that formal processes to engage investors are still being developed.  When procurement of investors and potential partners are put to the market, the investor leads generated and fostered through MIPIM and the follow up undertaken throughout the year with these investors will be made clear.

As Coun. Aspden will know from his membership of the YEP Board, the business community have expressed their support for the city of York being represented at MIPIM and are firmly behind this initiative.”

(iii)     To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Ayre:

“At the last ordinary Council meeting held in December, the Cabinet Member for Leisure claimed that the Council Leader would answer the following question when information became available in January. Perhaps the Leader would now give us the information: Can  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.