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.

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 Committee’s remit can do so. The deadline for registering is 5:00 pm on Friday, 3 April 2009.

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

To approve and sign the minutes of the last meeting of the SMC (Calling-in), held on 5 January 2009.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the Scrutiny Management Committee (Calling In) held on 5 January 2009 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

To consider the decision of the Executive on the above item, which has been called in by Councillors Scott, Merrett and Potter in accordance with the provisions of the Council’s Constitution.  A cover report is attached setting out the reasons for the call-in and the remit and powers of Scrutiny Management Committee (Calling In) in relation to the call-in procedure together with the original report and the decision of the Executive. 

Members received a report which asked them to consider the decisions taken by the Executive, at their meeting on 31 March 2009, regarding the schemes within the City Strategy Capital Programme planned for delivery in 2009/10 and options for the use of additional funding from the Regional Funding Allocation.

Details of the Executive’s decisions were attached as Annex 1 to the report.  The original report to the Executive meeting was attached as Annex 2.  The decisions had been called in by Cllrs Scott, Potter and Merrett for the following reasons:

“The Executive has misdirected itself in that:-

(i)                 It failed to follow the recommendations of the Shadow Executive.

(ii)               The Executive's decision directly contradicts its own Local Transport Plan policy, specifically:

'In making land use and transport-related decisions and implementing local transportation measures, regard has been given to the council's 'hierarchy of transport users' where pedestrians and cyclists are at the top of the hierarchy and car users are at the bottom'.

(excerpt - Page 38, City of York Council Local Transport Plan 2006-11 - see also Table 5.1, York’s ‘Hierarchy of Transport Users’, page 46).”

Members were invited to decide whether to confirm the decisions of the Executive (Option A) or to refer them back to the Executive for reconsideration and / or amendment (Option B).

The debate revolved around the options presented to the Executive for the spending of the additional funding expected from the Regional Funding Allocation.  In response to questions from Members, Officers confirmed that the key issue was whether the chosen schemes were both strategic and deliverable.  Although both options fitted these criteria, it was felt that Option 1, as chosen by the Executive, was slightly more strategic and would be easier to deliver with the staff resources currently available.

Following questions and a full debate, Cllr Scott moved, and Cllr Taylor seconded:

“That the matter be referred back to the Executive with a recommendation that they approve Option 2, on the basis that it complies with the Local Transport Plan policy.”

The motion was then put to the vote and was declared CARRIED by five votes to three and it was therefore

RESOLVED: That Option B be approved and that the matter be referred back to the Executive with a recommendation that they approve Option 2 [in the original report to Executive], on the basis that it complies with the Local Transport Plan.

REASON:      In accordance with the Constitutional procedures for called-in decisions and to deal with the issues raised by the Calling-In Members.