Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Venue: The Guildhall, St Peter's Place, Canterbury

Contact: Pippa Tritton  01227 862 009 Email: democracy@canterbury.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

516.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Vickery-Jones.

517.

Substitute Councillors

Minutes:

Councillor I Stockley was present as a substitute for Councillor Vickery-Jones.

518.

Declaration of any interests

TO RECEIVE any declarations for the following in so far as they relate to the business for the meeting:-

 

a.       Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

b.       Other Significant Interests (what were previously thought of as non-pecuniary Prejudicial interests)

c.       Voluntary Announcements of Other Interests

 

Voluntary Announcements of Other Interests not required to be disclosed as DPI’s or OSI’s, ie announcements made for transparency reasons alone, such as:

         Membership of outside bodies that have made representations on agenda items, or

         Where a Councillor knows a person involved, but does not have a close association with that person, or

         Where an item would affect the well-being of a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc but not his/her financial position.

 

[Note: an effect on the financial position of a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc; OR an application made by a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc, would both probably constitute either an OSI or in some cases a DPI].

 

Minutes:

In relation to Item 6, Licensing Policy, the following councillors made voluntary declarations that they were members of the Licensing Committee:  Councillors Butcher, Clark, Howes and Maslin.  Councillor M Jones-Roberts made a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest due to being a member of the licensing trade.

 

In relation to Item 7, Parish Council Capital Grants, Councillor Flack made a voluntary announcement that she was Chair of Blean Parish Council.

 

In relation to Item 8, Public Bathing and Seaside Pleasure Boats Byelaws Review, Councillors Clark and Stockley made a voluntary declaration that they were members of the Seaside Byelaws Task and Finish Group.  Councillor Carnac made a voluntary announcement that she was a recreational boat user.

 

In relation to Item 10, Possible remit of a Community Support Champion, Councillor Cornell made a voluntary announcement that he was a trustee of Whitstable Umbrella Centre who worked with Canterbury Food Bank.

 

 

519.

Minutes of the meeting held on 25 September 2019 pdf icon PDF 82 KB

TO CONFIRM as a correct record.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting dated 25 September 2019 were agreed and signed as a true record.

520.

Public participation

The Chairman to report any requests from members of the public who have given notice that they wish to speak on any item on the agenda.  The public must give notice to Democratic Services by 12.30pm on the working day before the meeting.

Minutes:

The Chairman advised that Councillor Kenny would speak on Item 10 – Possible remit of a Community Support Champion as the proposer of the original motion to Council.  There were no public speakers registered.

521.

Licensing Act 2003 Policy Statement Special Cumulative Impact Policy pdf icon PDF 104 KB

TO CONSIDER the joint report of the Director of Community Services and Head of Safer Neighbourhoods.

Minutes:

(Councillor M Jones-Roberts declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest and left the Chamber for this item. Councillors Butcher, Clark, Howes and Maslin made voluntary announcements that they were members of the Licensing Committee.)

 

Doug Rattray, Head of Safer Neighbourhoods introduced a report regarding the Cumulative Impact Policy which was retained when the council’s current Statement of Licensing Policy was implemented in 2017.  He added that any council with a Cumulative Impact Area (CIA) must review it within three years of its adoption in order to decide whether it was fit for purpose, still required and if it met the legal requirements of a CIA.

 

The CIA had been introduced initially as a result of a large number of premises in the St Margaret’s Street area which had led to public nuisance.

 

He explained that the current licensing policy, and the introduction of core licensing hours, was working extremely well and it was felt that the CIA policy could be discontinued.

 

Three options was available to councillors, these were:

 

a)     Discontinue the present policy for CIA area (recommended).

b)     Adopt a new policy for the present CIA areas of St Margaret’s Street and Orange Street.

c)     Discontinue the present policy and make a requirement for the future need of a policy for CIA to be assessed at the time of renewal of the main Licensing Policy in April 2022.


Councillors discussed the options available to them and the Head of Safer Neighbourhoods provided clarification where necessary. 

 

Option A was proposed, seconded and when put to a vote unanimously agreed.

 

RECOMMENDED (to Full Council) – that the current Special Cumulative Impact Policy be discontinued on 19 April 2020.

 

Reason for decision: The 2008 policy is now redundant, lacks evidence to support it and has been replaced by more effective measures in the 2017 Licensing Policy.

 

Record of voting


For the proposal (11):

Councillors Baker, Butcher, Clark, Carnac, Cornell, Dawkins, Flack, Howes, Maslin, Sole and I Stockley.

Against/abstained (0)

Absent for voting (1): Councillor M Jones-Roberts

 

 

 

522.

Parish Council Capital Grants Scheme 2020-21 pdf icon PDF 81 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of Director of Commissioned Services and Head of Commercial and Cultural Development

 

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED – To fund all projects at 72.5% uplifted by the individual parish council’s score over the average score.

 


Reason for the decision: The option would provide some support for all projects.  All applications had demonstrated evidence of local need, contribution towards corporate objectives and were match funded.

 

 

 

Minutes:

(Councillor Flack made a voluntary announcement that she was Chair of Blean Parish Council.)

 

Stacey Wells, Commissioning Projects Officer introduced the report detailing parish council capital grant applications for 2020-21 and the options for the allocation of the available budget.

 

She advised that the available budget for 2020/21 was £20,000 and £27,572 of applications had been received.  An application summary had been emailed to Rural Forum members and parish clerks for comment, and an additional option to fund all projects at 72.5% uplifted by the individual parish councils’’ score over the average score had been suggested as a result.  It had been confirmed that part-funded projects would still be viable with gap funding being fulfilled by reserves or further fundraising.

 

In response to a question about the funding of defibrillators, it was confirmed that the Kent Association of Parish Councils had a contract with the British Heart Foundation to provide defibrillators for members at a discounted rate.

 

The Commissioning Projects Officer explained that all applications were carefully scrutinised.  Applications under £10k had to be accompanied by two written quotes, and applications over £10k had to be accompanied by three.

 

Four options were available to councillors:

 

Option 1 – to fund the highest scoring application with the budget available

Option 2 – to fund all projects at 72.5%

Option 3 – to fund all projects at 72.5% uplifted by the individual parish council’s score over the average score (recommended)

Option 4 – to fund all projects at 100% (requiring the provision of additional budget).

 

Option 3 was proposed, seconded and when put to a vote agreed.

 

RESOLVED – To fund all projects at 72.5% uplifted by the individual parish council’s score over the average score.

 

Record of voting:

 

For the proposal (11):

Councillors Baker, Butcher, Carnac, Cornell, Dawkins, Flack, Howes, M Jones-Roberts, Maslin, Sole and I Stockley.

Against proposal/away for voting (0)

Abstained (1): Councillor Clark


Reason for the decision: The option would provide some support for all projects.  All applications had demonstrated evidence of local need, contribution towards corporate objectives and were match funded.

 

 

 

523.

Public Bathing and Seaside Pleasure Boats Byelaws Review pdf icon PDF 111 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of Director of Community Services.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(Councillors Clark and Stockley made voluntary declarations that they were members of the Seaside Byelaws Task and Finish Group.  Councillor Carnac made a voluntary announcement that she was a recreational boat user.)

 

Suzi Wakeham, Director of Community Services introduced the report which set out the findings of the Seaside Byelaws Task and Finish Group. 

 

She explained that the last review of the two existing byelaws - ‘Seaside Pleasure Boats (Section 76 of the Public Health Act 1961) and ‘Public Bathing’ (Section 231 of the Public Health Act 1936) (Appendix 1) had been undertaken in 1995 and there had been significant changes in behaviour and equipment since then.

 

The Review had taken 18 months and had involved a number of consultations and stakeholder events.  Over 500 people had responded to the consultation.  Further work would be undertaken to investigate licensing of powered craft and charging for launch ramps but this would not delay the application to make the new byelaws.

 

Councillors thanked officers for the report which was felt to be fair to all water users.  The introduction of an 8 knot speed limit would make the sea more secure for swimmers, and it was felt that the rationale for changes was clear.

 

Matthew Young, Foreshore Manager explained that although no additional enforcement resources had been allocated, staffing resources were focussed around events, good weather and good tides.  He added that clear signage was already being prepared in readiness of approval from the Secretary of State.

 

In response to a question, the Foreshore Manager advised that the legally required review process for amending a byelaw took a great deal of time,  but that the service would continue to review any amendments, their effectiveness and suitability.

 

Three options were present in the report:

 

Option 1 – Retain the arrangement of the present byelaws

Option 2 – Proceed with Task and Finish Group recommended amendments to the Byelaws (recommended)

Option 3 – Task and Finish Group to review the proposed amendments to the byelaws.

 

Option 2 was proposed, seconded and when put to a vote unanimously agreed.

 

RECOMMENDED (to Full Council) – that the findings of the Review be accepted and that the amendments to the Byelaws proposed by the Seaside Byelaws Task and Finish Group be approved.


Reason for the decision:  A comprehensive review had been completed and the proposals meet changes in the nature of activities that take place on our coastline and are proportionate for those affected.  The proposed amendments had support from stakeholders, users and residents.

 

Record of voting:

 

For the proposal (12):

 

Councillors Baker, Butcher, Carnac, Clark, Cornell, Dawkins, Flack, Howes, M Jones-Roberts, Maslin, Sole and I Stockley.

 

Against proposal/abstained/away for voting (0)

 

 

 

 

 

524.

Housing, Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy 2018-2023 - Year 1 Progress Update pdf icon PDF 125 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Deputy Chief Executive.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Nick Churchill, Property and Regeneration Strategy Manager presented an update on Year 1 progress of the Housing, Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy 2018-2023.

 

He explained that the Strategy was an overarching, cross disciplinary document setting out how the council would respond to local housing needs across all tenures, making better use of the existing housing stock and addressing the needs of vulnerable people.  As well as being required by law, the Strategy was important as it  drew attention to local housing needs and priorities.

 

He reported that nearly all the projects outlined in the Action Plan had started, apart from those that were scheduled to begin in years 2 or 3.  The Strategy’s Action Plan was a five year document that had been designed to be sufficiently flexible to take into account any changes to local or national housing policy.

 

A councillor welcomed the update and acknowledged the local and national challenges that had been experienced over the last twelve months.  In response to a question about the provision of adapted housing for those with disabilities, the Head of Housing and Community Services advised that East Kent Housing had its own budget to adapt housing within stock to meet people’s needs.  In addition the council administered the Disabled Grants budget for homeowners. There was also a requirement for 20% of new residential developments to be built to a standard adaptable for disabled people in the adopted Local Plan.

 

It was noted that the council was currently consulting on the future of council housing management in East Kent and its proposal to bring housing management back in house.


Councillors expressed concern regarding the situation with East Kent Housing and worries over the tenants and staff affected. A discussion was held regarding the possibility of a Working Group being established to look at these issues.  It was felt it  would be inappropriate to do this now as the consultation period was still active and it was instead proposed, seconded and when put to a vote unanimously agreed to recommend to Policy and Resources Committee that a Housing Working Group be established at a suitable time to look at the management of housing stock.

 

RESOLVED – That the report is NOTED.

RECOMMENDED (to Policy and Resources Committee) that a Housing Working Group be established to look at the management of housing stock following the outcome of the consultation.

 

Record of voting

 

For the proposal (12):

 

 Councillors Baker, Butcher, Carnac, Clark, Cornell, Dawkins, Flack, Howes, M Jones-Roberts, Maslin, Sole and I Stockley.

 

 Against proposal/abstained/away for voting (0)

 

 

525.

Possible remit of a Community Support Champion pdf icon PDF 81 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Head of Corporate Governance.

Minutes:

(Councillor Cornell made a voluntary announcement that he was a trustee of Whitstable Umbrella Centre who worked with Canterbury Food Bank.)

 

(Councillor Kenny spoke during this item as the proposer of the original Motion to Council.)

 

The Head of Corporate Governance introduced the report which asked the committee if it wished to comment on the possible remit of a Community Support champion. 

 

He explained that a Notice of Motion had been submitted to the October 2019 Council meeting endorsing the appointment of a Food Poverty champion.  A proposal had been forward during the debate to amend the motion to Community Support Champion, and it had been decided to refer the discussion to the Community Committee.  It was noted that ultimately the decision to appoint councillor champions was a matter for the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council. 

 

Councillors discussed the report in detail and made a number of comments including:

 

·        There was concern that a Community Support Champion role would be too generic, and the Motion had been about Food Poverty.

·        Was the creation of a Champion the best way to deal with food poverty?

·        Food Poverty champion could work across a number of teams.

·        There was an argument to have both a Food Poverty and Community Support Champion, but a viable scope would need to be put together.

·        It could be argued that all councillors were community champions who could signpost to food banks and other appropriate support.

·        It was suggested that a Health and Well-being Champion may be an alternative to a Food Poverty or Community Support Champion.

·        Officers already worked with a number of agencies locally and can advise councillors on how to sign post appropriately.  There was a Health and Well-Being board in the district with a councillor representative.

·        It was suggested that a cross-party group have an informal discussion about the potential scope for a possible role.

 

After a long discussion regarding the possible remit of a Community Support Champion, the committee AGREED to an informal cross-party discussion, the conclusions of which would be fed back to the Chief Executive and Leader of the Council.

 

 

 

 

 

526.

Date of next meeting

7pm, Wednesday 22 January 2020.

Minutes:

7 pm, Monday 22 January 2020.

527.

Any other urgent business to be dealt with in public

Minutes:

There was no other urgent business to be dealt with in public.

528.

Exclusion of the Press and Public

TO RESOLVE – That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act or the Freedom of Information Act or both.

529.

Any other urgent business which falls under the exempt provisions of the Local Government Act 1972 or the Freedom of Information Act 2000 or both

Minutes:

There was no other urgent business to be dealt with in public.