Agenda, decisions and minutes

At this point, Members are asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interest they may have in the business on this agenda.

Members were invited to declare at this point in the meeting any personal or prejudicial interests they might have in the business on the agenda.  No interests were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the Executive meeting held on 21 September 2010.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the Executive meeting held on 21 September 2010 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

At this point in the meeting, members of the public who have registered their wish to speak regarding an item on the agenda or a matter within the Executive’s remit can do so.  The deadline for registering is 5:00 pm on Monday 4 October 2010.

It was reported that there had been two registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme, both in relation to agenda item 5 (Affordable Housing Viability Study).

John Reeves, of the Helmsley Group, pointed to flaws in the Study arising from incorrect assumptions about land values and sales, resulting in an unrealistic affordable housing target.  He urged Members to approve Option 2 in the report, allowing more time for developers and Council Officers to reach agreement on the input figures.

Eamonn Keogh, of Turley Associates, speaking on behalf of York Property Forum and York Chamber of Commerce, agreed with the points raised by Mr Reeves and echoed his request that Members approve Option 2.

To receive details of those items that are listed on the Forward Plan for the next two Executive meetings.

Members received and noted details of those items listed on the Forward Plan for the next two meetings of the Executive.

This report advises the Executive on the production of the Affordable Housing Viability Study for York as required by national planning guidance in Planning Policy Statement 3 Housing.

RESOLVED: (i)         That approval be given in principle to adopt a ‘dynamic model’ approach for assessing affordable housing numbers and that Officers be requested to carry out further research into the assumptions made in the model to ensure that these reflect local circumstances and meet the requirements of the Study.

                        (ii)        That Officers be requested, when reporting back in November, to identify any additional changes to planning policies which might be made in the period leading up to the adoption and implementation of the new Local Development Framework (LDF), and which could provide a short term stimulus aimed at getting a start made on new housing developments in the City.

REASON:      To ensure that the Affordable Housing Study is a robust evidence base that can be used as part of the LDF evidence base.

Members considered a report which advised them on the production of an Affordable Housing Viability Study (AHVS) for York, as required by national planning guidance contained in Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3), Housing.

The AHVS, carried out by Fordham Research, and the ‘Dynamic Model ‘ principles contained within it, had been recommended for approval by the Local Development Framework Working Group (LDFWG) at their meeting on 5 July 2010.  Concerns raised by speakers at that meeting had been addressed at subsequent meetings with a sub-group of the Property Forum set up to work with Officers on the AHVS, and at an additional stakeholder event.  Key issues raised at that event were detailed in Annex 1 to the report.  Officers and the Property Forum were now carrying out additional research into some of the assumptions set out in Annex 1.

Two options were presented for Members’ consideration:

Option 1 – to adopt the Study as presented to the LDFWG on 5 July.

Option 2 – to agree the Study approach but allow Officers additional time to ensure that the assumptions reflected local circumstances and met the requirements of the Study.  This was the recommended option.

Having noted the comments of the Labour Group Spokespersons on this item, and the comments made under Public Participation, it was

RESOLVED: (i)         That approval be given in principle to adopt a ‘dynamic model’ approach for assessing affordable housing numbers and that Officers be requested to carry out further research into the assumptions made in the model to ensure that these reflect local circumstances and meet the requirements of the Study.¹

                        (ii)        That Officers be requested, when reporting back in November, to identify any additional changes to planning policies which might be made in the period leading up to the adoption and implementation of the new Local Development Framework (LDF), and which could provide a short term stimulus aimed at getting a start made on new housing developments in the City.²

REASON:      To ensure that the Affordable Housing Study is a robust evidence base that can be used as part of the LDF evidence base.

This report outlines the proposals within the White Paper “Liberating the NHS”, in particular, those that have most impact for the Local Authority, and seeks approval for a proposed response to consultation on the White Paper and for the development of a Transitional Health and Wellbeing Board to oversee and support the local changes that the White Paper potentially heralds.

RESOLVED: (i)         That the responses in Annex 1 to the report be approved and that further reports be provided on the detailed implications and opportunities as they become known.

REASON:      To ensure that York’s views are made known, and to enable the authority to review the implications of major change in more detail.

                        (ii)        That approval be given to set up a Transition Board in York, under the direction of the Chief Executive, building on the work of the Healthy City Board, with terms of reference to be developed by Officers and brought back to the Executive for approval.

REASON:      To enable the thinking and planning to be undertaken locally, in line with the general advice from the Chief Executive of the NHS.

Members considered a report which outlined the proposals contained in the government White Paper Liberating the NHS and sought approval for a suggested response to consultation and for the development of a Transitional Health and Wellbeing Board to oversee and support the local changes potentially heralded by the White Paper.

Briefly, the proposals involved offering more choice and control to patients on the provision of treatment, making local authorities responsible for improving population health outcomes, the establishment of Health and Well-Being Boards to carry out the current statutory functions of Health Overview and Scrutiny committees, and the transfer to local consortia of GPs of commissioning currently undertaken by Primary Care Trusts.  Four consultations had been launched; on the outcomes framework, the commissioning arrangements, local democratic legitimacy in health and provider regulation.  Responses were required by 11 October 2010.

The proposals had been considered by both the Healthy City Board and the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee, whose views were summarised in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the report.  A draft response to the consultation on behalf of the Council was attached at Annex 1, and Members were invited to approve or amend this response and to agree the establishment of a Transition Board in York, under the direction of the Chief Executive.

Having noted the comments of the Labour Group Spokespersons on this item, it was

RESOLVED: (i)         That the responses in Annex 1 to the report be approved and that further reports be provided on the detailed implications and opportunities as they become known. ¹

REASON:      To ensure that York’s views are made known, and to enable the authority to review the implications of major change in more detail.

                        (ii)        That approval be given to set up a Transition Board in York, under the direction of the Chief Executive, building on the work of the Healthy City Board, with terms of reference to be developed by Officers and brought back to the Executive for approval. ²

REASON:      To enable the thinking and planning to be undertaken locally, in line with the general advice from the Chief Executive of the NHS.

This report informs the Executive of the Department for Transport’s consultation on possible changes to rail franchising, highlights the specific implications of the changes for York and presents a proposed response to the specific questions in the consultation.

Note: Annex A to this report (the consultation paper) has not been included in the agenda pack and is available to view on-line only.  Printed copies have been circulated to Executive Members and Group Leaders.

RESOLVED: That the proposed response to the consultation paper set out in Annex B to the report be approved, subject to the comments being strengthened to include the following issues:

a)                 improved carriage facilities for bicycles;

b)                 action to deal with overcrowding issues on key commuter routes and recognising the reduction in rolling stock for Northern Rail;

c)                  the need for an engagement process involving City Regions and LTAs to ensure that non-PTE areas are involved in the franchising process.

REASON:      To ensure that the Council takes this opportunity to share its views on rail franchising with the Department of Transport, and to ensure that the response reflects Members’ concerns.

Members considered a report which informed them of the Department for Transport’s consultation on possible changes to rail franchising, highlighted the specific implications of the changes for York, and sought approval for a proposed response to the consultation.

The consultation paper elaborated on the Government’s aspirations to deliver a more efficient, responsive and value for money rail industry, by attracting private investment through the grant of longer franchises.  The paper had been made available on the Council’s website as Annex A to the report.

The proposed response, attached as Annex B and summarised in paragraphs 11 to 23, was broadly supportive of the proposals but warned against awarding franchises on the basis of unrealistic growth predictions, argued that the Government should retain a proportion of the revenue risk and suggested incorporating a reward-based system into the franchise as an incentive to meet targets for improving cost efficiency.

Having noted the comments of the Labour Group Spokespersons on this item, it was

RESOLVED: That the proposed response to the consultation paper set out in Annex B to the report be approved, subject to the comments being strengthened to include the following issues:

a)                 improved carriage facilities for bicycles;

b)                 action to deal with overcrowding issues on key commuter routes and recognising the reduction in rolling stock for Northern Rail;

c)                  the need for an engagement process involving City Regions and LTAs to ensure that non-PTE areas are involved in the franchising process. ¹

REASON:      To ensure that the Council takes this opportunity to share its views on rail franchising with the Department of Transport, and to ensure that the response reflects Members’ concerns.

This report provides the Executive with an update on the Council’s approach to attendance at work and recommends a number of revised work/life balance policy provisions in order to achieve significant and sustained improvements in attendance levels.

RESOLVED: (i)         That the work undertaken in this area, and the need to continue to treat the management of sickness absence as a priority, be noted.

                        (ii)        That the revised policy provisions set out in paragraph 14 of the report be approved, subject to a review of each change and a demonstration that this does not impact on the delivery of services.

                        (iii)       That the Economic Partnership be invited, through the chairman, to bring forward local best practice in reducing staff sickness levels.

REASON:      In order to achieve significant and sustained improvements in staff attendance levels.

 Members considered a report which provided an update on the Council’s approach to attendance at work and recommended a number of revised work / life balance policy provisions to achieve significant and sustained improvements to staff attendance levels.

Significant improvements in sickness absence rates had been achieved over the past three years, and benchmarking had indicated that York’s sickness absence procedures incorporated all elements of best practice. Work undertaken to ensure a holistic approach to attendance had included management training, health and well-being promotion activities and the provision of additional services by the Occupational Health Service. 

The Council’s current work / life balance provisions had been reviewed and the revised provisions piloted as part of the Officer of the Future work being undertaken by the Accommodation Project.  As a result, a number of new and amended provisions were recommended, details of which were set out in paragraph 14 of the report.  They included extending the flexible working scheme to all employees, a revised flexitime scheme and the adoption of a compressed hours policy, in order to enable attendance at work and contribute to lower sickness absence levels in the long term.

Having noted the comments of the Labour Group Spokespersons on this item, it was

RESOLVED: (i)         That the work undertaken in this area, and the need to continue to treat the management of sickness absence as a priority, be noted.

                        (ii)        That the revised policy provisions set out in paragraph 14 of the report be approved, subject to a review of each change and a demonstration that this does not impact on the delivery of services. ¹

                        (iii)       That the Economic Partnership be invited, through the chairman, to bring forward local best practice in reducing staff sickness levels. ²

REASON:      In order to achieve significant and sustained improvements in staff attendance levels.

This report asks Members to consider a recommendation made by the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services on 22 June 2010 that they approve the service plans for food law enforcement, health and safety law enforcement and animal health enforcement.

RESOLVED: That the Executive Member’s recommendation be accepted and the service plans for health & safety law enforcement and animal health enforcement be approved.

REASON:      In accordance with statutory and constitutional requirements.

[See also under Part B inutes]

Members received a report which asked them to consider a recommendation, made by the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services at a Decision Session held on 22 June 2010, to approve the service plans for food, health & safety and animal health law enforcement.

It was noted that the food law enforcement plan would require Full Council approval, as it formed part of the Council’s Policy Framework.

RESOLVED: That the Executive Member’s recommendation be accepted and the service plans for health & safety law enforcement and animal health enforcement be approved. ¹

REASON:      In accordance with statutory and constitutional requirements.

RECOMMENDED: That Council approve the food law enforcement plan.

REASON:                  In accordance with statutory and constitutional requirement.

[See also under Part A Minutes]

Members received a report which asked them to consider a recommendation, made by the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services at a Decision Session held on 22 June 2010, that they approve the service plans for food, health & safety and animal health law enforcement.

It was noted that the food law enforcement plan would require Full Council approval, as it formed part of the Council’s Policy Framework.

RECOMMENDED: That Council approve the food law enforcement plan. ¹

REASON:                  In accordance with statutory and constitutional requirement.