Agenda and minutes

At this point, Members are asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interests 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 any of the business on the agenda.

Councillor Evans declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Executive item 6 (Relocation of Peasholme Centre – Site Analysis) as a family member lived opposite one of the proposed sites.  He withdrew from the room and took no part in the discussion or decision on this item.

Councillor Horton declared a personal interest in Executive item 6 (Relocation of Peasholme Centre – Site Analysis) as the Council’s representative on the Peasholme Board and a personal and prejudicial interest as a potential member of the Planning Committee that would consider the subsequent planning application for the chosen site.  He withdrew from the room and took no part in the discussion or decision on this item.

Councillor Simpson-Laing declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Executive item 6 (Relocation of Peasholme Centre – Site Analysis) asa potential member of the Planning Committee that would consider the subsequent planning application for the chosen site.  She withdrew from the room and took no part in the discussion or decision on this item.

Councillor Horton declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Executive item 7 (Proposed Development of Manor School) asa potential member of the Planning Committee that would consider the subsequent planning application for the site.  He withdrew from the room and took no part in the discussion or decision on this item.

Councillor Simpson-Laing declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Executive item 7 (Proposed Development of Manor School) asa potential member of the Planning Committee that would consider the subsequent planning application for the site.  She withdrew from the room and took no part in the discussion or decision on this item.

Councillor Merrett declared a personal interest in Executive item 12 (LTP Delivery Report) as an honorary member of the Cyclists’ Touring Club and a member of Cycling England.

RESOLVED:That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of Annex 7 to Executive item 6 (Relocation of Peasholme Centre – Site Analysis), Annex 2 to Executive item 10 (Lendal Bridge Sub-Station, Wellington Row) and Annex 2 to Executive item 11 (Clifton Family Centre, Burton Stone Lane) on the grounds that they contained information relating to the financial and business affairs of particular persons, which was classed as exempt under paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as revised by The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006).

To approve and sign the minutes of the Shadow Executive meeting held on 5 July 2006.

RESOLVED:             That the minutes of the meeting of the Shadow Executive held on 5 July 2006 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 an issue within the Shadow Executive’s remit can do so. The deadline for registering is Tuesday 18 July 2006, at 10.00 am.

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

To consider the items on the agenda for the Executive meeting to be held on 25 July 2006, and to take a decision on whether to call-in any of these items.

Please note that the reports relating to these items will be published on the Council’s website on 14 July 2006. The website address is www.york.gov.uk  Copies of the Executive agenda and reports are also available for viewing at public libraries in York and can be obtained by telephoning Democracy Support Group on York (01904) 551088.

The Shadow Executive made the following comments on the Forward Plan at page 1 of the papers circulated for the Executive meeting to be held on 25 July 2006:

The Shadow Executive:

·  May require Officer attendance at the relevant Shadow Executive meeting/s in respect of the following items (current Executive dates in brackets):

o Consideration of Waste PFI Outline Business Case (12/9)

oCorporate Asset Management Plan (26/9)

oCapital Strategy Document 2006-09 (26/9)

·  Queried whether the report listed as “Parking Review” was the annual review of parking or a different item, and requested that a brief note be circulated to them clarifying this matter.

The Shadow Executive considered a report which was listed as item 6 on the agenda for the Executive meeting on 25 July, at page 9.  The report advised the Executive of the outcome of consultation on and appraisal of the two possible sites for the relocation of the Peasholme Centre and sought their views on which site would be most suitable.

Having discussed the issues set out in the report, the following comments were agreed:

The Shadow Executive:

·  Objected to the lack of examination of the alternative option that they had raised in the past and that a large number of residents had favoured at a public meeting, namely that the Peasholme Centre be reincorporated into the redeveloped Hungate site.

·  Queried the level of residential parking proposed given the nature of the occupants and the city centre location.

RESOLVED:(i) That the Executive be asked to take the above comments into account when considering this item.

                        (ii)        That the item not be called in.

The Shadow Executive considered a report which was listed as item 7 on the agenda for the Executive meeting on 25 July, at page 41.  The report set out proposals from the Governing Body of Manor School to relocate the school and to increase its capacity, summarised the outcome of consultations on these proposals and outlined further proposals for a land transfer and associated capital contribution to allow the relocation to proceed.

Having discussed the issues set out in the report, the following comments were agreed:

The Shadow Executive:

·  Reiterated its continued support for the reprovision of Manor School on an enlarged basis, but remained concerned regarding the risks involved in locating it on a Green Belt site, especially now that it was known that the British Sugar site would be vacated, which was immediately adjacent to the existing school and offered an alternative non-Green Belt site.

·  Requested that officers be asked to examine this alternative.

RESOLVED:(i) That the Executive be asked to take the above comments into account when considering this item.

                        (ii)        That the item not be called in.

The Shadow Executive considered a report which was listed as item 8 on the agenda for the Executive meeting on 25 July, at page 57.  The report sought approval for a proposed 3 year Organisational Effectiveness Programme (OEP) and asked Members to consider how the Executive might most effectively support and have involvement in delivery of the OEP. 

Having discussed the issues set out in the report, the following comments were agreed:

The Shadow Executive:

·  Noted, with regards to paragraph 4 of the report, that the issue of needing to deliver significant organisational improvement and a change in culture in the Council had been recognised 4 years ago and had led to the establishment of the Transforming York programme.

·  Was disappointed to see 4 years later that little progress had been made and that the process was having to be restarted.

·  Was concerned as to whether the report properly addressed the issue, expressing the view that it remained light on the issue of implementing culture change, contained actions which only amounted to a “to do list” and dealt with resourcing implications cursorily.

·  Was particularly concerned whether staffing resources were available to deliver the programme.

·  Highlighted that to be effective the Council needed to be open and well led and there were currently problems in this regard, openly informing and positively engaging with the public.

RESOLVED:(i) That the Executive be asked to take the above comments into account when considering this item.

                        (ii)        That the item not be called in.

The Shadow Executive considered a report which was listed as item 9 on the agenda for the Executive meeting on 25 July, at page 81.  The report asked the Executive to consider the final report of the Environment and Sustainability Scrutiny Board and Sustainable Street Lighting Scrutiny Sub-Committee on the topic of “Street Lighting – Strategic Management & Procurement to Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Waste”.

Having discussed the issues set out in the report, the following comments were agreed:

The Shadow Executive:

·  Needed a clearer view of the financial implications of a number of the recommendations before they could give a final view on the proposals.

RESOLVED:(i) That the Executive be asked to take the above comments into account when considering this item.

                        (ii)        That the item not be called in.

The Shadow Executive considered a report which was listed as item 10 on the agenda for the Executive meeting on 25 July, at page 121.  The report asked Members to consider the future use of a former sub-station at Wellington Row, adjoining Lendal Bridge.

Having discussed the issues set out in the report, the following comments were agreed:

The Shadow Executive:

·  Was concerned that there was no evidence that the Council’s protocol on disposal of assets had been fully followed (ie: internal consultation with departments) to ascertain if there were any alternative uses for the site.

·  Supported Option B.

RESOLVED:(i) That the Executive be asked to take the above comments into account when considering this item.

                        (ii)        That the item not be called in.

The Shadow Executive considered a report which was listed as item 11 on the agenda for the Executive meeting on 25 July, at page 131.  The report recommended demolition of the existing Family Centre at Burton Stone Lane, and subsequent sale of the site, on completion of the new children’s centre at Clifton Green Primary School.

Having discussed the issues set out in the report, the following comments were agreed:

The Shadow Executive:

·  Was concerned that there was no evidence that the Council’s protocol on disposal of assets had been fully followed (ie: internal consultation with departments) to ascertain if there were any alternative uses for the site.

·  Noted that Ward Members had not yet submitted their comments on this item.

RESOLVED:(i) That the Executive be asked to take the above comments into account when considering this item.

                        (ii)        That the item not be called in.

The Shadow Executive considered a report which was listed as item 12 on the agenda for the Executive meeting on 25 July, at page 139.  The report informed the Executive that the Local Transport Plan (LTP) Delivery Report had been prepared and would be issued to the Department for Transport at the end of July.

Having discussed the issues set out in the report, the following comments were agreed:

The Shadow Executive:

·  Was concerned the draft Annual Progress Report (APR) was not available for discussion and wished to call-in the item unless the Shadow Executive Spokesperson, or a substitute Member, was allowed to attend the Executive and speak on this issue as necessary.

·  Was concerned at the failure to deliver on a number of targets, notably regarding cycling - despite the massive amount of money the government provided for Local Transport Plan 1 (LTP1) - and at the risks identified in paragraphs 41-42 of the report to future funding as a result.

·   Was also concerned about, in effect, the abandonment of the completion of the Park & Ride programme and the “hearts and minds” work relating Green Travel Plans, which formed part of LTP1.

·  Had continuing concerns regarding the Bus Location & Information Sub-System (BLISS) and the non-functioning of a number of its components.

·  Was concerned, with regards to parking, that no distinction was made between commuter parking, which came under the original demand management strategy, and local residents’ evening and other parking.

·  Was concerned about the failure to effectively progress the air quality management aspects of LTP1.

RESOLVED:(i) That the Executive be asked to take the above comments into account when considering this item.

(ii)That the item be called in, unless the Executive agree to allow the Shadow Executive Spokesperson, or a substitute Member, to speak on this issue at the Executive meeting as necessary.