Minutes Template

<AI1>

12. Declarations of Interest

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.

Cllr Mason declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 8(iv) (the motion on Ensuring Access for All), as the holder of a Blue Badge.

Cllr Lomas declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 8(iv), as the holder of a Blue Badge, stating that she had been advised by the Monitoring Officer that the interest was prejudicial but that she believed this advice to be discriminatory.

Note: at a later stage in the meeting, prior to consideration of Item 8(iv), the Lord Mayor, after consultation with the Chair of Joint Standards Committee, granted a dispensation to allow both the above Members to participate in the discussion and decisions relating to this item.

Cllr Norman declared a pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 8(iv), as an employee of NHS Healthcare. He left the room during consideration of that motion and took no part in the discussion or decision thereon.

</AI1>

<AI2>

13. Minutes

Resolved: (i) That the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on 22 March 2021 be approved, and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

(ii) That the minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 5 May 2021 be approved, and signed by the Chair as a correct record, subject to the following amendments:

· Minute 109 (Declarations of Interest) - remove the description of Cllr Aspden’s interest (as this was not stated at the meeting);

· Minute 111 (Public Interest Report) – amend the voting list under Recommendation (ii) to remove Cllr Wells from the list of those in favour and add Cllr Fitpatrick to the list of those against.

(iii) That the minutes of the Annual Council meeting held on 27 May 2021 be approved, and signed by the Chair as a correct record, subject to amendments to correct errors in the attendance list.

</AI2>

<AI3>

14. Civic Announcements

The Lord Mayor announced:

· The receipt of a plaque from Commander Giles Parkin to mark the affiliation of HMS Dragon with the city of York, which was available to view in the meeting room;

· The first Lord Mayor’s Charities event of the mayoral year, which would take place on Monday 19 July in the Sky Bar at Malmaison in York.

</AI3>

<AI4>

15. Public Participation

It was reported that there had been 9 registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Gwen Swinburn spoke on matters within the remit of Council. She raised concerns regarding governance, Joint Standards Committee, FOI requests, resource allocation to wards and staff costs, and recommended a return to the committee system.

Hon Alderman Ann Reid spoke in support of the motion at Agenda Item 8(i) (A Planning System that works for Residents), stating that government planning reforms provided no opportunity for local input and would not prevent developers from delaying work on sites for which planning permission had been granted.

Lars Kramm spoke on the motion at Agenda Item 8(ii) (Working Towards Improving Democracy and Services), commenting that a move to a committee system could be part of the solution to deficiencies in the current ‘strong leader’ model.

Andrew Mortimer spoke in support of the motion at Agenda Item (iii) (Fixing Social Care), as a carer for a family member, highlighting the need for a clear government plan to deal with a broad range of issues in relation to social care.

Jane Burton spoke in support of the motion at Agenda Item 8(iv) (Ensuring Access for All) on behalf of York Disability Rights Forum, highlighting the importance of Blue Badge parking close to the city centre to protect the rights and freedoms of disabled people.

Iain Mitchell also spoke on Item 8(iv), on behalf of York Sight Loss Council. He drew attention to the council’s duty under the Equalities Act and the social model of disability and urged Members not to vote for the amendment to the motion.

Kataya Mckeever-Willis also spoke on Item 8 (iv), stating that the council should find more innovative solutions to increasing access to the city centre and should work with disabled groups on this, rather than taking a ‘one size fits all’ approach.

Diane Roworth also spoke on Item 8 (iv), asking why Blue Badge holders could not resume access to the city centre now that the pandemic was ending and suggesting that a reduced speed limit would be a more appropriate way to improve safety.

Alison Hume also spoke on Item 8 (iv), on behalf of York Accessibility Action and as a carer for a young adult with disabilities. She contrasted York’s approach to that of other cities and asked Members to accept that York’s disabled parking spaces were now too far from the city centre to provide accessibility.

</AI4>

<AI5>

16. Petitions

It was reported that notice had not been received of any petitions to present under Standing Order 15.

</AI5>

<AI6>

17. Report of Executive Leader, Questions, and Executive Recommendations

A – Executive Leader’s Report

A written report was received from the Executive Leader, Cllr Aspden, on the work of the Executive.

Members were then invited to question the Leader on his report. Questions were received from the floor from the following Members in relation to the subjects listed, and replied to as indicated:

Local Government Reorganisation

From Cllr Pavlovic: Should the government decide that York will have less independence to run its own affairs, would this be the result of a lack of confidence in this administration? If so, how would you judge the part that your leadership and behaviour has played in this?

Response: No, I don’t agree that it would. However, I agree with your comment about the importance of retaining decisions about York in York, and this reflects the work done by the council and others in putting that case as strongly as possible. I have heard today that there may be a slight change in the government’s aspirations on devolution but very much hope that York will remain as it is; should it not, officers and councillors would want to come together and work on this very quickly.

From Cllr Fenton: Can you set out what you expect the next steps to be once a decision has been received on this?

Response: The MHCLG has confirmed today that we will receive an answer before Parliament goes into recess. Work will then begin with civil servants around what is on offer. There’s an indication that county deals are also being discussed, and if an East-West amalgamation is decided the matter will be brought back to Council to consider, although we hope that will not happen.

Local Plan

From Cllr Warters: Will you apologise to Dunnington residents for a recent leaflet showing the wrong boundaries for their village? And will the council have the capacity to deal with the Local Plan process, when the interim director is set to leave at the end of October?

Response: Our aim is to get the consultation results to the Planning Inspector by August so that hearings can be held in October as agreed with the Inspectorate. I understand there was a printing error on a small number of leaflets, and residents have received a letter of apology.

York Central and Great British Railways

From Cllr Pearson: Have you had a response from the Minister of State for Rail about locating the Great British Railways HQ in York?

Response: Yes, a quick reply was received from Chris Heaton and I have responded with a letter and a slide pack compiled by the LEP and a subsequent conversation with Mr Heaton and the Chair of Network Rail.

SEND Inclusion Review

From Cllr Webb: Can you expand on what you mean by ‘deliver provision differently’? [Supplementary] Is it a euphemism for cuts to services?

Response: Officers are looking at the results of the consultation and will bring a detailed report to Executive, to which we can respond and make improvements. I am happy to talk with you in advance about that. I agree that there is a chronic underfunding of children’s services by government, and this review is looking at efficiency, ensuring delivery of baseline services and if they can improve.

B – Executive Recommendations

Capital Programme Outturn 2020/21 and Revisions to the 2021/22-2025/26 Programme

Cllr Aspden moved, and Cllr D’Agorne seconded, the following recommendation contained in Minute 13 of the Executive meeting held on 24 June 2021:

Recommended: That the re-stated 2021/22 to 2025/26 programme of £600.778m, as summarised in Table 3 at paragraph 104 of the report and detailed in Annex A, be approved.

Reason: To enable the effective management and monitoring of the council’s capital programme.

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

Resolved: That the above recommendation be approved.

</AI6>

<AI7>

18. Report of Deputy Leader and Questions

A written report was received from the Deputy Leader, Cllr D’Agorne.

Members were then invited to question the Deputy Leader on his report. Questions were received from the floor from the following Members in relation to the subjects listed, and replied to as indicated:

Cycle lanes

From Cllr Douglas: Why do you pretend it is still possible to put in cycle lanes on Piccadilly? [Supplementary] Will we get segregated cycle lanes or not?

Response: Piccadilly is adjacent to the Castle Gateway re-development project; the project design is due to come forward for formal adoption this autumn, and we are willing to look at any changes that will effectively address the concerns raised.

Smart Transport Evolution Programme (STEP)

From Cllr Waudby: Can you provide an update on this scheme?

[Supplementary from Cllr Crawshaw: What work is being done to develop policies to sit behind this?]

Response: DfT funding has been obtained to look at modelling in preparation for changes with the advent of connected vehicles. Work will now feed into our real time modelling system, so that we can anticipate traffic flow and make adjustments in real time. One of the key benefits of the system is that it provides a basis for development of the Local Transport Plan and the opportunity to model the impact of various options on traffic flow.

</AI7>

<AI8>

19. Motions on Notice

(i) A Planning System that Works for Residents

Cllr Daubeney sought consent to alter his motion to incorporate the amendment submitted by Cllr D’Agorne.

Council having granted consent, the altered motion was moved by Cllr Daubeney and seconded by Cllr Hollyer, as follows:

“Proposed changes to existing planning legislation risk further reducing the democratic oversight and deregulating the planning process, failing to address the need for a balance in the planning system to maintain heritage and accountability.

Council notes:

· The significant concerns expressed by residents, Housing, Communities and Local Government Select Committee, CPRE and many professional planning bodies and local government representatives over the Conservative Government’s Planning Reforms.

· Local resident concerns about their reduced ability to object to building works under Permitted Development Rights which have been extended under this Government.

· Widespread concerns and condemnation of the Planning White Paper proposals across Local Government, The Planning and Architecture Sector, and organisations concerned with protecting green open spaces and heritage.

· Government proposals to deregulate planning will remove the rights of residents to influence or object to inappropriate development where they live.

· Local councils, in consultation with their businesses and residents are best placed to understand the issues in their area and respond with a spatial strategy tailored to that area.

· The further weakening of the ability of local councils to secure and enforce necessary planning conditions and compliance with environmental and building regulations.

Consequently, Council resolves to call on the Government to scrap its Planning White Paper and instead:

· Undertake a wholesale review of Permitted Development Rights.

· Make the Planning Inspectorate more accountable to local people.

· Ensure a simpler system with adequate funding to enable planning authorities such as York to ensure that planning conditions (including construction management plans) are complied with, protecting the quality of life of nearby residents or businesses both during and after the construction period.

· Ensure that local resident engagement is at the heart of planning and any reforms do not threaten the accountability and engagement process and Councillors are able to play their democratic role.

· Implement reforms that would help local authorities build more social housing, including cheaper loans, access to low-priced public land and the right to keep 100 per cent of the sale price of council homes sold off under Right to Buy scheme to reinvest in new homes.”

Cllr Galvin then sought consent to withdraw his submitted amendment. Council having granted consent, that amendment was withdrawn.

The motion, as altered, was then put to the vote and declared CARRIED and it was

Resolved: That the above motion be approved.¹

(ii) Working Towards Improving Democracy and Services

Moved by Cllr Doughty and seconded by Cllr Rowley.

“Council acknowledges the challenges Covid-19 has brought to everyday life of our citizens. Many millions have worked tirelessly and shown resilience without complaint in order to help keep the city and country running. This applies to within the Council organisation and we give grateful thanks to them.

Council is pleased the UK vaccination programme has been amongst the most advanced, with a sizeable majority of adults having received their first vaccination and a majority (almost two thirds at time of print) of adults now having had their second jabs.

Data shows that despite further new Covid cases, the vaccination programme is breaking the link between cases and the levels of serious hospital admissions previously seen.

Now, Council believes more ambition is needed by the Council leadership in restoring basic democracy which has been

sidelined and improving basic services our residents expect. The administration has shown no urgency to properly restore the Committee Calendar so elected Councillors (not just the Executive) can have oversight and scrutinise decisions being taken. It remains unacceptable for many meetings taking place ‘informally’ with no minutes publicly available for accountability.

Concerning for residents is the continued deterioration in basic services, recently including repeatedly late and in many cases completely uncollected green waste, overgrown vegetation which is once again becoming a problem and deteriorating roads and paths throughout the city.

Therefore, Council asks that the current administration commits to:

· Return to work at West Offices of all Directors and Senior management. While working at home might be possible for some tasks sometimes, after 16+ months, a focus on leadership is needed to address some of the service issues experienced here in York.

· A report to Customer and Corporate Services Scrutiny Management Committee on actions and mitigations taken to save taxpayer money in York. This in light of claims of a £6M funding shortfall in York due to Covid despite record national spending by Government. The report should detail how savings have, are and will be made and also indicate how the Council ensures the upto 20 likely redundancies indicated in local media recently are not amongst frontline key workers directly providing the services that residents value.

· A commitment to review the Council Committee Calendar in the coming weeks to enable a return to as normal as possible a Calendar.

· A commitment that Council meetings are held at West Offices where possible, or similar prominent city buildings (ensuring sensible cost) if they have a greater capacity. It would be hoped that educational establishments such as the universities and Community stadium management etc. would be cognisant that their institutions have already received huge financial assistance (and otherwise) from the taxpayer, directly or via the Council.

· Risk assessments for possible meeting venues to be shared with all Councillors especially in light of concern that a large City venue, which despite being open to the general public (in large numbers at times) appeared to be discounted for meetings by CYC, on health grounds for CYC staff and Councillors.”

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

Resolved: That the above motion not be approved.

(iii) Fixing Social Care

Moved by Cllr Runciman and seconded by Cllr Barker.

“The past year has further underlined the vital role that our social care services play in supporting our communities. The pandemic has exposed the fragility of those services and amplified the workforce, funding and sustainability challenges.

Council notes:

· Our thanks to all those who work in social care systems, from carers to cleaners and caterers, to those working in care homes and domiciliary care, and those who provide so much care for friends and family, expecting nothing in return.

· Despite years of promises, the Government has failed to outline a feasible plan which would fix the long term funding issues in social care.

· Social care must be a full and equal partner with the NHS in enabling more people to remain independent, living in their own home or in their community.

· Using adult social care precept to fund social care is unsustainable; depending on unfair council tax is not the solution.

· Social care costs for over-65s have increased in recent years in York as well as the rest of the UK.

Consequently, Council resolves:

· To have all Group leaders jointly call on the new Health and Social Care Secretary to urgently begin cross-party discussions to enable Ministers to bring forward comprehensive plans that would address short and long term funding needs of the care sector.

· Such proposals should set out:

o Funding for short-term stabilisation, addressing short-term funding challenges, which have been worsened by Covid, to prevent further deterioration in the access to and quality of care.

o A long-term plan for social care that sets the priorities for investment and transformation of services and systematically addresses the workforce challenges;

o A funding settlement that provides local government with the necessary finance to implement the long-term plan over the next five years; and

o Arrangements to protect people from incurring catastrophic care costs by pooling the risk and making the current means-test more comprehensive.”

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

Resolved: That the above motion be approved.²

(iv) Ensuring Access for All

Cllr Melly sought consent to alter her motion to incorporate the amendment submitted by Cllr Rowley.

Council having granted consent, the altered motion was moved by Cllr Melly and seconded by Cllr Crawshaw, as follows:

“Council notes:

· that York is a Human Rights City;

· that every local authority has a duty under the Equalities Act to enable people to get as close as reasonably possible to where they need to get to;

· that disabled people are not a single homogenous group and therefore a raft of measures may be required in order to make the city centre fully accessible and to appropriately mitigate any reduced vehicular access;

· that having alternative provision of services - eg online services - is not a substitute for access;

· the significant numbers of complaints made by Blue Badge holders who feel excluded from the city centre following recent extensions to the pedestrianised footstreets area;

· that even before the Covid19 access changes, accessibility to York city centre was poor for many residents;

· the ‘Healthier, Greener York’ motion passed by Council in December 2019 calling for a city-wide approach to reducing car-dependency, which drew a clear distinction between essential and non-essential journeys and which specifically requested that the Executive Member for Transport ‘works closely with disability advocacy groups and Blue Badge Holders to ensure that access to the city centre is maintained and improved for people with mobility difficulties or who are otherwise unable to use public transport’.

Council believes:

· that there are many benefits to extending the pedestrianised footstreets area for residents, businesses and visitors, including disabled and non-disabled people;

· that increasing city centre access for some should not come at the cost of creating barriers for others;

· that accessibility is about meeting the needs of all residents visiting the city centre as opposed to merely ensuring access to the edge of the city’s historic core;

· that ensuring accessibility includes ensuring sufficient provision of appropriately located seating, toilets, changing places, baby change facilities, cycle racks and Blue Badge parking;

· that whilst at times the different needs of different disability groups may conflict with one another, City of York Council must not privilege one group over another, nor pit the needs of one group against another;

· that City of York Council has not yet done enough to ensure the city centre is accessible to all residents.

Council resolves to request that the Executive and relevant Executive Member:

· undertake a review of city centre seating, working closely with older adult and disability advocacy groups, to ensure sufficient ‘rest-stops’ are available throughout the pedestrianised footstreets area;

· ensure that all new benches installed across York are age and disability friendly, with appropriate backs and arm rests;

· ensure sufficient provision of fully accessible toilets, baby-changing facilities and changing places that are open at appropriate times and that are well-signposted;

· undertake a review of cycle rack provision to ensure secure parking is available for the full range of cycles, including mobility aids and trailers;

· explore options for a frequent shuttle ‘train’/bus that is fully accessible, not limited to Blue Badge Holders, not stigmatising and that enables people to get to and from a range of places within the pedestrianised footstreets area that they need access to;

· review the provision of charging points for mobility aids such that those who wish to access the city centre via this method can be confident that they will not get stuck and be forced into embarrassing or stressful situations;

· direct council officers to work with partners, through the Quality Bus Partnership, to work collaboratively with local disability representative groups to review how drivers prioritise wheelchair users’ access and makes Class 3 access training available in York;

· in conjunction with Age Friendly York, local disability representative groups and Quality Bus Partnership, develop agreed criteria for accessible bus stops;

· review the policy around choice of road and pavement surfaces city-wide, to ensure that aesthetic and financial considerations are not prioritised over ergonomics or accessibility, and that a consistent approach is taken to tactile paving city-wide;

· ensure that an easily accessible, up-to-date map of Blue Badge parking is available to residents online and in hard copy upon request;

· review and consider national best practice examples for pedestrian core accessibility such as Chester and Leicester, and implement measures that improve pre-existing access such that City of York Council meets its obligation to ensure equality of city centre access for all York residents;

· build on the promotion of flags like the Armed Forces flag, the LGBT flag and Trans flag by committing to fly the Disabled Pride flag at least once a year (for example a day in July, Disabled Pride month) from the Mansion House and other appropriate flag poles;

· to further the aim of raising awareness of Disabled Pride and the issues faced by disabled people, that the logo of the Disabled Pride flag be used by CYC where possible – for example on notices, posters and email signatures if people wish.”

Cllr D’Agorne then moved, and Cllr Ayre seconded, an amendment to the above motion, as follows:

In the first paragraph, after ‘Council notes’:

- In the 2^nd bullet point, delete all after ‘Equalities Act to’ and insert ‘consider the impact of any changes they make and make reasonable adjustments to ensure that the impacts on those with protected characteristics are minimised’.

- In the 4^th bullet point, delete all after ‘online services -’ and insert ‘is being improved as a part of Council’s digital inclusion work’.

- In the 5^th bullet point, delete all before ‘extensions’ and insert ‘Through an ongoing consultation of disability group representatives, some residents who are blue badge holders have voiced their objections to’.

- Delete the 6^th bullet point and substitute:

· Recognising that York is a compact city with street patterns that go back to medieval times, full accessibility is a concern that is currently being addressed

- In the 7^th bullet point, insert ‘following’ at the start, delete all up to ‘Executive Member for Transport’, delete all after ‘Executive Member for Transport and insert ‘has authorised an unprecedented level of engagement with disability advocacy groups to address their concerns and improve access for people with mobility difficulties.’

“In the second paragraph, after ‘Council believes’:

- In the 3^rd bullet point, delete all after ‘city centre’.

- In the 5^th bullet point, insert at the start ‘Through the ongoing consultation officers and members are acknowledging that’, delete ‘whilst’, delete all after ‘one another’, and insert ‘and the Council needs to mediate between these’.

- In the 6^th bullet point, delete ‘has not yet done enough’ and insert ‘is facilitating an extensive engagement with local disability groups and residents with restricted mobility as it works’.

In the third paragraph:

- To the end of the first sentence, beginning ‘Council resolves’, add ‘continue addressing the following suggestions through the ongoing accessibility arrangement review’.

- In the 9^th bullet point, after ‘review the policy’ insert ‘as a part of the Council’s review of parking and routes to and through the city centre’, after ‘ensure that’ delete ‘aesthetic and financial considerations are not prioritised over’, after ‘ergonomics’ delete ‘or’ and insert ‘and’, and after ‘accessibility’ insert ‘are taken into account’.

- In the final bullet point, after ‘review’ delete ‘and consider’, and after ‘Leicester and’, delete ‘implements’ and insert ‘whilst recognising that every city has different issues and challenges, consider’.”

On being put to the vote, the amendment was declared CARRIED.

The motion, as amended, now read as follows:

“Council notes:

· that York is a Human Rights City;

· that every local authority has a duty under the Equalities Act to consider the impact of any changes they make and make reasonable adjustments to ensure that the impacts on those with protected characteristics are minimised

· that alternative provision of services - eg online services - is being improved as a part of Council’s digital inclusion work.

· through an ongoing consultation of disability group representatives, some residents who are blue badge holders have voiced their objections toextensions to the pedestrianised footstreets area;

· recognising that York is a compact city with street patterns that go back to medieval times, full accessibility is a concern that is currently being addressed;

· following the “Healthier, Greener York” motion passed by Council in December 2019 calling for a city-wide approach to reducing car-dependency, the Executive Member for Transport has authorised an unprecedented level of engagement with disability advocacy groups to address their concerns and improve access for people with mobility difficulties.

Council believes:

· that there are many benefits to extending the pedestrianised footstreets area for residents, businesses and visitors, including disabled and non-disabled people;

· that increasing city centre access for some should not come at the cost of creating barriers for others;

· that accessibility is about meeting the needs of all residents visiting the city centre;

· that ensuring accessibility includes ensuring sufficient provision of appropriately located seating, toilets, changing places, baby change facilities, cycle racks and Blue Badge parking;

· through the ongoing consultation officers and members are acknowledging that at times the different needs of different disability groups may conflict with one another and the Council needs to mediate between these;

· that City of York Council is facilitating an extensive engagement with local disability groups and residents with restricted mobility as it works to ensure the city centre is accessible to all residents.

Council resolves to request that the Executive and relevant Executive Member continue addressing the following suggestions through the ongoing accessibility arrangement review:

· ensure that all new benches installed across York are age and disability friendly, with appropriate backs and arm rests;

· ensure sufficient provision of fully accessible toilets, baby-changing facilities and changing places that are open at appropriate times and that are well-signposted;

· undertake a review of cycle rack provision to ensure secure parking is available for the full range of cycles, including mobility aids and trailers;

· in conjunction with Age Friendly York, local disability representative groups and Quality Bus Partnership, develop agreed criteria for accessible bus stops;

· review the policy, as a part of the Council’s review of parking and routes to and through the city centre, around choice of road and pavement surfaces city-wide, to ensure that ergonomics and accessibility are taken into account and that a consistent approach is taken to tactile paving city-wide;

· ensure that an easily accessible, up-to-date map of Blue Badge parking is available to residents online and in hard copy upon request;

· review national best practice examples for pedestrian core accessibility such as Chester and Leicester, and, whilst recognising that every city has different issues and challenges, consider measures that improve pre-existing access such that City of York Council meets its obligation to ensure equality of city centre access for all York residents.”

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

Resolved: That the above motion, as amended, be approved.³

Action Required

1. To note the contents of the motion on A Planning System that Works for Residents and take appropriate action.
2. To note the contents of the motion on Fixing Social Care and take appropriate action.
3. To note the contents of the motion on Ensuring Access for All and take appropriate action.

</AI8>

<AI9>

20. Questions to the Leader or Executive Members

Question to Cllr Ayre, Executive Member for Finance & Performance

From Cllr Fenton: With regard to recent press reports about significant changes to the Coney Street area, including a riverside walkway and bridge, can you share more information about this?

Response: We secured funding from the LEP for a feasibility study to look at options for 3 sections of the riverside, including a new bridge to connect to York Central; 2 of these options cannot be progressed within available resources, but we’re submitting a bid to the Levelling Up fund to enable us to work with commercial partners to extend the walkway up to Ouse Bridge, and are optimistic about its success.

Questions to Cllr Smalley, Executive Member for Culture, Leisure & Communities

From Cllr Webb: With regard to statements about filling in a ‘5 minute form’ to apply for play area funding and in view of officer guidance that some play areas would qualify for funding on the basis of need, do you understand why your decision to change the rules part way through the process has left parents and kids feeling abandoned?

[Supplementary from Cllr K Taylor: What would you say to community groups and ward members who have worked hard on their bids, having told them that it was just about filling in a 5 minute form?]

[Supplementary from Cllr Musson: Are you still convinced that a competitive process was the best choice]

Response: I am proud of the play area improvement project. The original plan to invest £150k in a survey of play areas was put on hold due to the pandemic and a £100k community pot was launched. The response was incredible, and it was decided to re-direct £75k from the survey fund to the community pot. With the addition of community contributions a total of £400k is set to be invested in play areas. I accept with hindsight that each bid would have taken up a lot of time. it was a competitive process and 4 bids were not accepted because they did not meet the criteria, but officer have worked with those bidders to find other sources of funding and I will lobby for more investment in the future.

</AI9>

<AI10>

21. Report of Executive Member

A written report was received from Cllr Widdowson, the Executive Member for Environment and Climate Change.

Members were then invited to question Cllr Widdowson on her report. The following question was received from the floor and responded to as indicated:

From Cllr Kilbane: Do you accept that your opening statement under Waste Services is wide of the mark, given residents’ experience of waste collections?

Response: There are issues with waste collection across the country in all local authority areas due to a shortage of HGV drivers resulting from the pandemic and Brexit, which has had a major impact on recruitment and retention. We are talking with Work With York and secondary recruiters about this, and are doing all we can with regard to green waste collections.

</AI10>

<AI11>

22. Scrutiny - Report of the Chair of the Customer & Corporate Services Scrutiny Management Committee

A written report was received from Cllr Crawshaw, Chair of the Customer and Corporate Services Scrutiny Management Committee, on the work of the Committee since the last report to Council, on 22 March 2021.

</AI11>

<AI12>

23. Pay Policy 2021/2022 Update

Council received a report which presented an amended version of the Pay Policy Statement for 2021/22 approved by Council on 22 March 2021, updated to reflect changes to the Chief Officer structure.

The following recommendation was contained in paragraph 16 of the report:

“That Council approves the updated Pay Policy Statement for 2019/20 relating to the pay of the Council’s senior staff.

Reason: In order to fulfil the requirements of Section 38 – 43 of the Localism Act 2011 for the council to produce and publish an annual policy statement that covers a number of matters concerning the pay of the council’s senior staff, principally Chief Officers and relationships with the pay of the rest of the workforce.”

Note: No vote was taken on the above item, and the Lord Mayor subsequently requested that it be brought back to the next Full Council meeting.

</AI12>

<AI13>

24. Adoption of the LGA Model Code of Conduct for Elected Members 2020

Council received a report which presented proposals for the adoption of the Local Government Authority’s Model Code of Conduct, following consideration of the Model Code by Joint Standards Committee.

The following recommendations were contained in paragraph 17 of the report:

“Full Council is requested to:

· Adopt the LGA Model Code of Conduct as recommended by the Joint Standards Committee for immediate implementation;

· The Model Code of Conduct will be incorporated into the Council’s Constitution and will replace the existing Code;

· The Joint Standards Committee will, in consultation with the Monitoring Officer, develop and promote a Member and Officer Development programme to support the implementation of the Model Code;

· Support the adoption of the Model Code of Conduct as adopted by City of York Council by Parish Councils and ensure recognition of the same is included within the Parish Charter.”

Note: No vote was taken on the above item, and the Lord Mayor subsequently requested that it be brought back to the next Full Council meeting.

</AI13>

<AI14>

25. Update on Allocation of Seats and Appointments to the Council Structure for 2021/22

Council received a report which sought decisions in respect of the allocation of seats and appointments deferred from the Annual Council meeting on 27 May 2021.

The following recommendations were set out in paragraph 6 of the report:

“Full Council is asked to:

(i) Decide whether to make an appointment on Audit and Governance Committee.

(ii) Approve or not approve the allocation of the seat to Councillor D Taylor on Economy and Place Policy and Scrutiny Committee.

(iii) Make any other appointments which may arise from the vote relating to the seat on Audit and Governance Committee.

Reason: To fulfil the Council’s statutory and constitutional requirements.”

In respect of Recommendations (i) and (iii), The Lord Mayor announced that two nominations had been received for appointment to the vacant seat on Audit and Governance Committee; namely, Cllr Rowley and Cllr Carr. At this point, Cllr Rowley withdrew his nomination and it was therefore

Resolved: That Cllr Carr be appointed to the Audit and Governance Committee.¹

In respect of Recommendation (ii), the Lord Mayor announced that Cllr D Taylor had confirmed his intention to take up the seat offered to him on Economy and Place Policy and Scrutiny Committee. The Monitoring Officer advised that external legal advice had been sought which had confirmed that the rules of proportionality did not apply in this case. Cllr Crawshaw stated that, as Chair of the Customer & Corporate Services Scrutiny Management Committee he wished to place on record his objection to the constitution of the committee, having himself sought legal advice which had reached the opposite conclusion.

On being put to the vote, the proposal to appoint Cllr D Taylor to the committee was declared CARRIED and it was

Resolved: That Cllr D Taylor be appointed to the Economy and Place Policy and Scrutiny Committee.²

The Lord Mayor further announced that the Liberal Democrat nomination to the Housing Appeals Committee, marked as ‘tbc’ on the Annual Council papers, had been confirmed as Cllr Hunter, and that this appointment did not require a vote.

Note: The above item was brought forward on the agenda by the Lord Mayor and was therefore dealt with before the guillotine fell.

Action Required

1 & 2: Make the agreed changes to the appointments on the system.

</AI14>

<AI15>

26. Appointments and Changes to Membership

Resolved: That the appointments set out on page 117 of the Agenda papers be approved.¹

Note: The above item was brought forward on the agenda by the Lord Mayor and was therefore dealt with before the guillotine fell.

Action Required

1. Make the agreed changes to the appointments on the system.

</AI15>

<TRAILER_SECTION>

Cllr C Cullwick

LORD MAYOR OF YORK

[The meeting started at 6.35 pmand concluded at 10.33 pm]

</TRAILER_SECTION>

<LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_SUMMARY

</LAYOUT_SECTION>

<TITLE_ONLY_LAYOUT_SECTION>

</TITLE_ONLY_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<HEADING_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_TITLE

</HEADING_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<TITLED_COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_TITLE

FIELD_SUMMARY

</ TITLED_COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_SUMMARY

</ COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_SUMMARY

</SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<TITLE_ONLY_SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

</TITLE_ONLY_SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

Acomb Ward	Bishopthorpe Ward

Barnes Lomas	Galvin
Clifton Ward	Copmanthorpe Ward

Myers Wells	Carr
Dringhouses & Woodthorpe Ward	Fishergate Ward

Fenton Mason Widdowson	D'Agorne
Fulford and Heslington Ward	Guildhall Ward

Aspden	Craghil Fitzpatrick Looker
Haxby & Wigginton Ward	Heworth Ward

Cuthbertson Hollyer Pearson	Douglas Perrett Webb
Heworth Without Ward	Holgate Ward

Ayre	Melly K Taylor
Hull Road Ward	Huntington and New Earswick Ward

Musson Norman Pavlovic*	Orrell Runciman
Micklegate Ward	Osbaldwick and Derwent Ward

Crawshaw Kilbane	Rowley Warters
Rawcliffe and Clifton Without Ward	Rural West York Ward

Smalley Wann Waudby	Barker Hook
Strensall Ward	Westfield Ward

Doughty Fisher	Daubeney Hunter Waller
Wheldrake Ward

Vassie