City of York Council
Resolutions and proceedings of the Meeting of the City of York Council held at the Guildhall, York on Thursday, 23 March 2023, starting at 6.30 pm
|
Present: The Lord Mayor (Cllr David Carr) in the Chair, and the following Councillors: |
|
Acomb Ward |
Bishopthorpe Ward |
|
|
|
|
Lomas
|
|
|
Clifton Ward |
Copmanthorpe Ward |
|
|
|
|
D Myers Wells
|
|
|
Dringhouses & Woodthorpe Ward |
Fishergate Ward |
|
|
|
|
Fenton Mason Widdowson
|
D’Agorne D Taylor
|
|
Fulford and Heslington Ward |
Guildhall Ward |
|
|
|
|
Aspden
|
Craghill Fitzpatrick Looker
|
|
Haxby & Wigginton Ward |
Heworth Ward |
|
|
|
|
Cuthbertson Hollyer Pearson
|
Douglas Perrett Webb
|
|
Heworth Without Ward |
Holgate Ward |
|
|
|
|
Ayre |
Heaton Melly K Taylor
|
|
Hull Road Ward |
Huntington and New Earswick Ward |
|
Musson Norman |
Cullwick Orrell Runciman |
|
|
|
|
Micklegate Ward |
Osbaldwick and Derwent Ward |
|
|
|
|
Baker Crawshaw Kilbane
|
Rowley BEM 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 |
|
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Barnes, Galvin and Pavlovic
52. Declarations of Interest (18:34)
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.
No interests were declared, but for the sake of transparency Cllr Doughty stated, in relation to Agenda Item 8(iv) (Council Backs Haxby Station Project) that he had recently taken early retirement from Northern Rail.
53. Minutes (18:35)
Resolved: That the minutes of the Budget Council meeting held on 23 February 2023 be approved, and signed by the Chair as a correct record.
54. Civic Announcements (18:35)
The Lord Mayor announced that he had recently received the following gifts on behalf of the City:
· A portrait painted by a soldier wounded in Ukraine, at an exhibition of art created as part of rehabilitation activities;
· A folk ornament from Thai local government officials at a University reception.
The Lord Mayor went on to read out a message from Cllr John Galvin, a long-serving Member and former Lord Mayor who was standing down at the next Election. He paid tribute to Cllr Galvin, who was unable to attend the Council meeting due to illness.
55. Public Participation (18:39)
It was reported that 10 people had registered to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.
Aoibheann Kilfeather spoke on Agenda Item 8(iii) (Motion on Removing Barriers to an Education and Educational Attainment), highlighting the importance of SEN support for school-refusing children of primary school age. Her daughter, Aoife, also spoke to share her own experience of this support and her successful return to school.
James Else also spoke on Motion (iii) in relation to SEN support, stating that teachers were doing an outstanding job within an outdated framework that had led to a negative spiral, particularly at secondary school, and was not fit for purpose.
Emma Strachan also spoke on Motion (iii), on behalf of a group of parents who believed their children with SEND were being failed by the education system in York, highlighting issues that had resulted from replacing teaching assistants with agency staff.
Cathryn Auplish also spoke on Motion (iii), as a parent of two children with SEND, sharing her own experiences of what had and hadn’t worked and recommending the development of a protocol as a first step to improvement.
Debbie Cobbett spoke on Agenda Items 6, 7, 10 and 11 (Reports of the Leader, Deputy Leader, Executive Member and Scrutiny Chair), expressing concern about a lack of publicity in York on voter ID requirements and stressing the need to address issues affecting the city, particularly in relation to climate change.
Flick Williams spoke on Agenda Item 11 (Report of the Scrutiny Chair), agreeing with the content of the report and stating that scrutiny committees must be properly resourced if the Council were continue to operate under the Leader and Executive model.
The remaining registered speakers did not attend the meeting.
56. Petitions (19:04)
Under Rule B5 2, the following petitions were presented for reference to the Customer and Corporate Services Scrutiny Management Committee, in accordance with the Council’s petition arrangements:
(i) A petition presented by Cllr Doughty, on behalf of residents calling on the council to prioritise the creation of an off-road cycle path connecting Strensall with Huntington and Earswick.1
(ii) A petition presented by Cllr Doughty, on behalf of residents of Strensall, calling on the council to prioritise the re-surfacing of Haxby Moor Road.2
(iii) A petition presented by Cllr Doughty, on behalf of residents of Stockton-on-the-Forest, asking the council to prioritise the re-surfacing of a number of roads in their area.3
(iv) A petition presented by Cllr Smalley, on behalf of residents calling on the council to adopt the roads and infrastructure on the Granary (RedRow) Estate in Clifton Without.4
|
Action Required 1.
Add the petition on creation of an off-road cycle path from
Strensall to Huntington to the petitions log for referral to
CCSMC
|
SS
|
57. Report of Executive Leader and Questions (19:09)
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:
2023/24 Council Budget
From Cllr Kilbane: Executive Members are telling people on the doorstep that exclusion of Blue Badge holders from the city centre was forced on them by the security services, which contradicts the account of former Supt. Mark Khan. Have ruling councillors agreed privately to mislead the public, and if not will you commit to disciplining those councillors who are telling people that?
Response: On the substantive question you are asking, we want everyone to safely enjoy our historic and beautiful city safely. As you know, strong advice was given…. If you want me to answer your tittle tattle question, I have seen your comments on social media, which I do not think are correct.
[Supplementary from Cllr Crawshaw: You are therefore suggesting that my father, who had his door knocked by 2 Executive Members and was told that they had not taken the decision to exclude Blue Badge holders from the city centre when they clearly had done [was not telling the truth]?]
Supplementary Response: You’ve not told me who or sent any message to me, so it’s impossible to answer that question. I do not believe the way you characterise it was exactly how it happened. I would be very happy to give you a substantive answer to the important questions you raise but you were heckling me so it was impossible to do so.]
Devolution
From Cllr Warters: Are you content to leave as your legacy to York the handing over of significant powers to an elected Mayor, who is very likely to be the current Police, Fire & Crime Commissioner your colleagues have been critical of in the Lib Dem motion at this meeting?
Response: York & North Yorkshire Devolution is a real opportunity for the city and the only way we will get significant funding to deliver projects to make a real difference in decades to come. In that sense, I couldn’t care less who the Mayor is in May 2024; what’s really important is to put aside our small political concerns and grasp the opportunities it gives.
[Supplementary: What happened to the promises you made under the Labour administration once you got the position of Leader?]
Supplementary Response: There was a hung council when Labour lost power and Opposition groups came together at that time and looked at various things, including how the Council makes its decisions. One of the things everyone signed up to was to do a review of that process and it will be for the new Council to follow that up and look at the pros and cons of different models going forward.
Purple Flag
From Cllr Lomas: This is a question I received from a resident of Westfield ward about the budget item on tackling anti-social behaviour mentioned in your report. She worries that a one-off commitment will fail to tackle the problem in the long term. Can you explain why this commitment doesn’t last beyond election year?
Response: The motion in front of us later states why this is an important issue to tackle. The funding is one-off and it was important to put it in the budget, but future councils are going to need to look at investing in community safety as well, in partnership with the police and the commissioner’s office. If you want to send a particular query to the Ward Members or myself we’d be happy to look at that too.
58. Report of Deputy Leader and Questions (19:38)
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:
10 Year Vision for Transport and Consultation
From Cllr Webb: Your administration has presided over a significant decline in cycling rates, squandered sustainable travel opportunities and set back traffic reduction by years. Given this track record, why would residents who share a vision of a cleaner, lower polluting city with more and safer active travel options back the Green party in this election?
Response: Because it has the vision and has already made a number of significant changes, as can be demonstrated by looking at the policies brought forward in spite of the challenges of Covid etc. We are committed to making good on those promises and implementing the schemes drawn up. We have to secure the funding to be able to deliver them, hopefully with cross-party support. We have a draft Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan which I hope all parties will be contributing towards so that we can make active travel a positive choice for people instead of using the car.
[Supplementary from Cllr Kilbane: Why have you spent 4 years talking about things rather than doing them?]
Supplementary Response: Certain projects in the past have moved forward without having that underpinning, and the last Labour administration did a u-turn on sustainable travel. We have been careful to try and avoid that situation by making sure our policies are underpinned with evidence and have the support of residents.
From Cllr Wann: Do you share my concerns about the national cuts to the Active Travel England programme?
Response: That certainly is a serious concern – the government put in place ambitious policies to promote Active Travel, with 50% of local trips to be by walking or cycling, but that cannot happen overnight without funding. If the government is going to withdraw that funding, the targets will not be met. Depending on the outcome of our most recent bid we may be able to put forward a fully costed response to the riverside path to Jubilee Terrace. Some funding and how that would be spent was identified at my Decision Session, but we need additional funding to be able to deliver.
[Supplementary from Cllr K Taylor: The city’s indicative allocation was £360k but a bid for £1.57m was submitted for the riverside pathway scheme. What is the Plan B if that doesn’t succeed?]
Supplementary Response: The figure you quote is correct, but the letter from the DoT indicates that councils are encouraged to bid for more if appropriate and that’s what we did. Your project did well to get to that point of being put forward.
From Cllr Crawshaw: In December 2019 you voted in favour of a motion to remove non-essential vehicles from the city centre and said you would have a plan in place by 2023. What has happened?
Response: Covid, among other things.
[The meeting was adjourned for a break at 19:50 and resumed at 20:12]
59. Motions on Notice (20:12)
(i) Care Leavers’ Transport Costs
Cllr Baker sought consent to alter her motion to incorporate the amendment submitted by Cllr Webb.
Council having granted consent, the altered motion was moved by Cllr Baker and seconded by Cllr D’Agorne, as follows:
“Council notes:
· That all Councillors are corporate parents and that a key principle of this responsibility is to help ensure that children & young people in our care are provided with the same opportunities that children and young people might reasonably expect to be provided with in any family;
· That care leavers over the age of 18 are currently offered:
o 10 hours of driving lessons
o Support with passing the Compulsory Basic Training (for motorcycles
o The cost of the first driving theory test
o The cost of the first driving test.
· That such support around private transport can help care leavers to access employment and leisure opportunities;
· That the council does not currently offer equivalent support for costs relating to public transport or incentives to choose active travel.
Council believes:
· That care leavers often face a significant range of barriers, crossing all spheres of life, and that we as corporate parents should always be mindful of our responsibility to work to remove these barriers wherever and however we can, acknowledging that just like in any family, the priorities of children and young people might not always align with those of the people responsible for them;
· That being able to travel beyond the city’s boundaries is important for both job opportunities and broader life experiences.
Council therefore resolves to request that following May’s elections, the new Executive consider what additional offer could be made to Care Leavers including assessing the feasibility of also offering care leavers the option of:
· Financial assistance with annual bus travel, a 16–25 rail card and discounted access to the TIER e-cycle/ e-scooter scheme up to the age of 25;
· Free urban cycle skills training;
· A contribution towards a bicycle and appropriate protective clothing and through working with partners, find ways to cover the full costs of a new bicycle and appropriate accessories.”
On being put to the vote, the motion was declared CARRIED and it was
Resolved: That the above motion be approved.1
(ii) Return to Community Policing
Moved by Cllr Daubeney, seconded by Cllr Smalley.
“This Council notes that:
· The number of Police Community Support Officers has fallen by 20% (50 full-time equivalent PCSOs) since 2021 across North Yorkshire.
· Despite a 4.99 per cent rise in the Police percept, which amounts to £14.03 extra for the average band D household, the North Yorkshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner has paused PCSO recruitment until March 2024.
· The Home Office is allocating just over £72 per head for police services in North Yorkshire, whilst Kent receives £113 and South Yorkshire Force receives £170.
· The 2023/24 budget provides £150k investment to improve community safety, tackling anti social behaviour hotspots, including through funding of extra specialist youth support workers.
· Devolved Ward funding has been used by ward councillors to support youth engagement activities, which support the work of the Safer York Partnership.
· Anti-social behaviour crime makes up 22.7% of all crimes reported in York.
· Whilst the number of ASB related incidents in York has decreased since the end of the pandemic, for certain areas, it remains a significant issue.
· Safer York Partnership provides both the strategic direction for community safety and oversees the coordinated delivery of community safety outcomes across the city of York and has representatives from key voluntary and statutory agencies including City of York Council, North Yorkshire Police, North Yorkshire Fire and Rescue, Probation, Public Health, Office of the Police and Fire Commissioner and York CVS.
· An Independent inspection of York Youth Justice Service has found it to be ‘outstanding’.
This Council believes that:
· Police Community Support Officers play a vital role in keeping our communities safe. The Government and the North Yorkshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner should be empowering them to do their job, not risking the slashing of their numbers, putting more pressure on stretched local council budgets to plug the gaps in community safety.
The Council consequently resolves to:
· Request that Group Leaders write to the North Yorkshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner calling for a reversal of the current freeze in PCSO recruitment and commitment to significantly increase the number of PCSOs in the region.
· Request that Council officers work with the North Yorkshire Police to produce a report to the Executive Member on how neighbourhood improvement plans can be developed, which review how to best holistically design out anti-social behaviour in the area.
· Invite the North Yorkshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner to a public meeting to answer councillor questions and set out plans to improve community policing in York.
· Request that the Safer York Partnership representatives engage and consult ward councillors in the development of the Community Safety Strategy 2023-2026.
· Call on Safer York Partnership chair to explore best ways to embed Community Safety Officers within the Community Safety Hub.”
Notice had been received of an amendment to the above motion. The Monitoring Officer explained that, due to an error, some wording had been omitted from the published version of the amendment. He read out the missing wording for clarification.
Cllr Fitzpatrick then moved and Cllr Crawshaw seconded the amendment, as follows:
“In the first paragraph, under ‘This Council notes that:’
- in the 1st bullet point:
obefore ‘2023/24’, insert ‘council’
oafter ‘workers’, insert ‘,a one-off, one year gimmick demonstrating no long-term commitment to tackling ASB’
- add a further bullet point to the end:
· ‘Council supports any cross-party working on positive interventions to tackle ASB such as additional youth activity and advice sessions across the city.’
In the second paragraph, under ‘This Council believes that:’
- insert a new 1st bullet point:
· ‘responses to ASB need to be multi-agency, including local councillors and residents, focussed, determined and committed over the long term in order to have any lasting and real impact on the problem;’
On being put to the vote, the amendment was declared LOST.
The original motion was then put to the vote and declared CARRIED, and it was
Resolved: That the above motion be approved.2
(iii) Removing Barriers to an Education and Educational Attainment
Moved by Cllr Looker and seconded by Cllr Webb.
“Council notes:
· almost 1 in 4 children live in poverty in York, a figure that rises to almost 1 in 3 nationally;
· the recent proliferation of formal and informal food banks in York and across the UK as more families become reliant on support to eat;
· the impact of the cost-of-living crisis being likely to increase those needing support in the years ahead, making free school meals (FSM) vital for an increasing proportion of York children;
· Obesity, dentistry problems, eating disorders and poor mental health in childhood all being exacerbated by lack of access to healthy food;
· the significant barriers to learning and achievement, both at school and at home, including fatigue and lack of concentration, for students that haven’t eaten properly due to poverty, and the role those barriers play in widening the educational attainment gap;
· 30% of all children living in poverty in our region are not eligible for free school meals;
· Decreasing levels of attendance and increasing levels of persistent absenteeism in both FSM and non-FSM students in York, following the height of Covid;
· recognition at the council-convened Cost of Living Summit of the impact expensive and unnecessary school-branded uniform makes to families living in poverty, including some not attending school.
Council recognises the importance of ensuring that every primary age school child in our city has access to at least one hot meal every day.
Further, it recognises particular needs of SEN pupils and believes school absence management policies that demonstrate consideration of individual circumstances are more likely to result in improved attendance than standardised, rigid responses that treat all students the same.
Council is committed to supporting institutions and their policies where they don’t stigmatise children living in poverty, where they adopt a culture of understanding around uniform, punctuality and difficulty concentrating due to often difficult individual circumstances.
Council resolves:
· to request the Executive commits the council to a policy of working with external organisations to provide FSM to all primary school pupils, starting with those schools most in need;
· to write to all York secondary schools, highlighting the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) ‘Cost of the School Day’ project to ask that students eligible for FSMs are able to use their allowance at any time during the school day, and to agree to the rolling over of any unspent money to be used in the future;
· to commit to a twin track approach of working through the LGA on FSM automatic enrolment as well as expanding eligibility for FSM by increasing the income threshold, and through the NEU on ensuring FSM provision becomes universal for every primary school child;
· to write, through the Corporate Director for Children’s Services, to all local authority-maintained schools and academy schools:
- requesting information on how they are meeting Government statutory guidance on keeping school uniform affordable, and keeping branded items to a minimum, to reassure Council that schools are not excluding students based on income and are genuinely open to all;
- inviting all schools to work with the local authority in developing a York protocol which describes ‘What should be ordinarily available’ for pupils with SEN ensuring there is a fair and consistent application of the SEND Code of Practice by schools to protect the rights of these pupils.”
On being put to the vote, the motion was declared CARRIED unanimously, and it was
Resolved: That the above motion be approved.3
(iv) Council Backs Haxby Station Project
Cllr Pearson sought consent to alter his motion in accordance with the altered wording set out on pages 11-12 of the supplementary papers.
Cllr Douglas then sought consent to alter her amendment to that motion in accordance with the altered wording set out on pages 12-14 of the supplementary papers.
Council having granted consent to alter both motion and amendment, Cllr Pearson moved and Cllr Cullwick seconded the altered motion, as follows:
“This Council notes that:
· The reopening of a station in Haxby has been a long-held ambition for the local community, after the station closed in 1930, and since then the town has expanded over decades.
· In June 2020, the City of York Council utilised funding to submit a bid for the Department for Transport’s New Stations Fund, making the case for funding to unlock the delivery of a new station in Haxby.
· To date, £1.5m of Government funding has been secured with commitments from York Outer's Conservative MP and the Prime Minister (then Chancellor) to provide the remaining funds, beyond the £4m of match funding pledged by the Council.
· A thorough evaluation from council officers and Network Rail explored options and the officers advised Executive that Towthorpe Road site presented the only realistic case for delivering the station. Considerations included the ownership of the land, deliverability within the Department for Transport’s required timescales, potential connectivity, and ease of access.
· Following the acquisition of the land by the Council, further work has been carried out on the project’s business case and design, with planning application expected to be submitted in May 2023, with determination at planning committee expected in August 2023.
· A public consultation undertaken in Apr/May 2022 by the Council saw 81% of 1,200 respondents support the station proposals.
· The new station would provide direct access to the rail network for thousands of local residents from Haxby, Wigginton, Strensall and surrounding communities. This means improved access to new employment, business and leisure opportunities, increasing connectivity for our part of York, and providing faster, more efficient, and sustainable travel.
· Delays in progressing with the project in the current timeline is likely to result in failing to secure sufficient government funding to deliver the station.
This Council believes that:
· It is crucial that the opportunity to secure the development of a station in Haxby is realised for the benefit of the local community and the whole city.
The Council therefore resolves to:
· Endorse and commit to the Haxby station project, and fully back it to ensure its success.
· Request that all group leaders send a joint letter to the Department for Transport and Network Rail supporting the project and urging for the remaining Government funding to be released from the Restoring Your Railway Fund to enable to proceed with the project at pace.”
Cllr Douglas then moved and Cllr Norman seconded the altered amendment, as follows:
“In the first paragraph, under ‘This Council notes that’
- In the 4th bullet point; after ‘explored’ insert ‘a limited number of’, after ‘advised Executive that’ insert ‘of the options under consideration’, and after ‘realistic case’ insert ‘within the tight parameters presented at that time,’.
- In the 5th bullet point, after ‘Following the’ insert ‘potentially premature’.
- In the 6th bullet point, after ‘respondents’, delete ‘support the station proposals’ and insert ‘support the principle of a new station in the Haxby area, but respondents were not asked to preference a specific location’.
- In the 7th bullet point; after ‘local residents’, delete all up to ‘This means’ and insert ‘giving’, and delete all after ‘opportunities’ and insert ‘but making it more difficult to access than alternative sites for residents in nearby neighbouring communities’.
- To the end of the 8th bullet point, add: ‘depending on the Government’s flexibility over timescales and commitment to reducing the carbon impact of the scheme. Such flexibility would provide an opportunity to review the siting and construction of a station, enabling it to better deliver for local residents and help contribute to the city’s sustainable transport ambitions.’
In the second paragraph, under ‘This Council believes that’
- Add 2 further bullet points:
· ‘Providing sustainable, low carbon alternatives to car dependency – especially in outer wards of the city – is crucial if York is reduce air pollution, improve accessibility and meet its ambitions of becoming net zero by 2030.
· The views of local people, including those of Haxby Town Council, must be respected and considered before making decisions which will have long-term implications for transport and sustainability.’
In the third paragraph, under ‘The Council therefore resolves to’
- In the 1st bullet point, after ‘commit to’, delete ‘the Haxby station project’ and insert ‘a railway station for Haxby.’
- Insert a new 2nd and 3rd bullet point:
· ‘Work closely with Haxby Town Council, local residents, Network Rail and the DfT to ensure that Haxby Station is delivered at the right location, not simply the most expedient one.
· Ensure that sustainability, accessibility and the city’s carbon-neutral ambitions are at the forefront of decision-making in relation to all transport projects in the city.’
On being put to the vote, the amendment, as altered, was declared LOST.
The original motion, as altered, was then put to the vote and declared CARRIED, and it was
Resolved: That the above motion be approved.4
|
Action Required 1.
To note approval of the motion on Care Leavers' Tranport Costs and
take the appropriate actions.
|
MK
|
60. Questions to the Leader or Executive Members (22:18)
Question to Cllr Craghill, Executive Member for Housing & Community Safety
From Cllr Waudby: Can you outline the work that has taken place to ensure that anyone operating short-term holiday lets in the city is aware of their responsibilities and makes sure to respect their local community?
Response: This is a concern for many residents, particularly in central wards like my own. A certain number of holiday lets is to be expected but the growing numbers are causing two main concerns - the impact of large groups on neighbourhoods and the potential effect on the availability and affordability of housing for York residents. We have limited powers to tackle these issues but are doing all we can and have produced guidance setting out the responsibilities of the letters, including management of noise and advice to check whether planning permission is needed. In cases of a material change of use we take enforcement action. The council is committed to building an evidence base on the impact of holiday lets in preparation for any government changes to the planning system, which we have lobbied for.
[The guillotine fell at 22:20]
61. Report of Executive Member (22:21)
The report was received. No questions were put, as the guillotine had fallen.
62. Scrutiny - Report of the Chair of the Customer & Corporate Services Scrutiny Management Committee (22:21)
The report was received.
63. Pay Policy 2023-2024 (22:21)
Council received a report which presented the Pay Policy Statement for 2023-2024.
As the guillotine had fallen, the following recommendation contained in the report was deemed moved and seconded and was voted on without debate:
“That Council approve the Pay Policy Statement for 2023 – 2024.
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.”
On being put to the vote, the recommendation was declared CARRIED and it was
Resolved: That the above recommendation be approved.1
Lord Mayor's Closing Remarks
On closing the meeting, the Lord Mayor thanked all Members, and in particular those who would be standing down at the election in May, for their hard work and dedication to the City.
Cllr D Carr
LORD MAYOR OF YORK
[The meeting started at 6.30 pmand concluded at 10.24 pm]