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 the business on the agenda.

No interests were declared.

RESOLVED:             That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of Annex B to Executive item 9 (Amber House and Workshop, Galmanhoe Lane – Freehold Disposal) (minute 162 refers), on the grounds that it contained information relating to the financial or 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 amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006.

To approve and sign the minutes of the Shadow Executive meeting held on 24 January 2007.

RESOLVED:             That the minutes of the meeting of the Shadow Executive held on 24 January 2007 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 6 February 2007, at 5.00 pm.

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

The Shadow Executive made the following comments on the minutes of the Executive meeting held on 30 January 2007, at page 1 of the papers circulated for the Executive meeting to be held on 13 February 2007:

The Shadow Executive:

·  With regards the fourth paragraph of minute 150 (Ward Committee Budgets), express the view that the way this issue was raised was a completely inappropriate and improper way of handling the alleged complaint, when there are proper Council procedures in place for handling complaints and given that the ward members had not been advised of the alleged complaint.

The Shadow Executive made the following comments on the Forward Plan at page 7 of the papers circulated for the Executive meeting to be held on 13 February 2007:

The Shadow Executive:

·  Note that there are a large number of items scheduled for the Executive meeting on 27 February 2007 and hope that adjustments can be made to ensure that this is a manageable agenda.

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

oEfficiency Programme, including Strategic Procurement Programme (27/2)

o Thin Client/Competition Strategy (27/2)

oFuture of Connexions Service (27/2)

oYork Central/British Sugar Area Action Plan (27/2)

oAcomb Library/Learning Centre (27/2)

oCorporate Asset Management Plan (13/3)

oAdmin Accommodation Project Update Report (13/3)

oNeighbourhood Services Restructure (13/3)

oInformation Governance Strategy (10/4)

The Shadow Executive considered a report which was listed as item 6 on the agenda for the Executive meeting on 13 February, at page 9.  The report presented proposals for the establishment of a Joint Committee, to be known as the Leeds City Region Leaders’ Board, which would enable the Council to play an active part in the development of the City Region agenda.

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

The Shadow Executive:

·  Raise issues regarding accountability arrangements for the Board and wish to be assured that meetings will be held in public, subject to the usual local government rules relating to confidential information, and that the agenda and minutes will be published and made publicly available.

·  Request that, wherever possible, key issues coming up should previously be brought through the Council’s democratic process.

·  Express the view that it would be more sensible if the first meeting was held after the May elections, so the Board could start off with up to date membership for all local authorities.

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 13 February, at page 21.  The report presented an evaluation of the resource and policy implications of the recommendations contained in the final report of the Confidentiality and Transparency Scrutiny Panel, which was brought to the Executive on 17 February 2006.

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

The Shadow Executive:

·  Reiterate their previous comment that the Scrutiny Panel strayed from its remit.

·  With regards to recommendation 3g), disagree with the officer comments and highlight the need for a decent amount of information on Section 106 Agreement funds to be made available to the appropriate planning committee meetings, including information on individual Section 106 Agreements relating to amounts received and spent, what funds have been spent on and the expiry dates after which funds would be lost.

·  With regards to recommendation 5e), highlight the need for a suitable design advocate to be available internally, as this is currently lacking.

·  With regards to recommendation 7g), recognise that a genuine issue is raised here that is not answered adequately by the officer comment, highlight the need for better handling of the reasons behind density assumptions in development briefs to avoid the figure being taken by the developers as the minimum density to achieve, and suggest that development briefs should set down a range in which the density should fall and the assumptions for these.

·  With regards to recommendation 7h), recognise that it is not always obvious to the public that liaison panels exist and highlight the need for appropriate publicity.

·  With regards to recommendation 7i), express concern that this implies that enforcement officers will be attending all planning meetings, which would reduce the staffing resources available for enforcement work.

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 13 February, at page 37.  The report detailed progress on the implementation of recommendations agreed in September 2004 in regard to flood prevention work and asked Members to decide whether they wished to receive future annual updates in September/October each year.

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

The Shadow Executive:

·  Note this report.

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 13 February, at page 51.  The report sought approval for the freehold disposal of Amber House and workshop, Galmanhoe Lane, York.

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

The Shadow Executive:

·  Note this report and that the plan appears to be incomplete as it shows the grounds to Amber House, but not Amber House itself.

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.

To receive a presentation from the Assistant Director (City Development & Transport) and the Head of Transport Planning on Park & Ride provision on the A59 and Wigginton Road.

The Shadow Executive received a presentation from the Assistant Director (City Development & Transport), the Head of Transport Planning and the City Strategy Capital Programme Manager on Park & Ride provision on the A59 and Wigginton Road.

The presentation began by outlining the purpose of Park & Ride and its benefits to city, the reasons for its success and customer feedback on the service.  It then discussed how the service might be developed in the future, including by increasing capacity at existing sites, developing new sites to serve the A59, Wigginton Road and other routes, improving facilities at the sites and in the city centre, and introducing bus priority.  It concluded by examining funding options and timescales for delivering improvements. 

A representative of Bus Users UK attended the meeting to contribute to the discussion on these issues.

Members requested that a copy of the letter from the Department of Transport (DfT) explaining why the City Region’s pump priming bid to the Transport Innovation Fund (TIF) had failed be circulated to them.

Members recorded their thanks to officers for the presentation and to the user group representative for attending the meeting.

RESOLVED:             That the presentation be noted.