To receive any apologies for absence from Members.

Apologies were received from Mr Hemsley and Mr Wilby.

To receive any announcements by the Chairman.

The Chairman announced that the list of engagements had been circulated.

To receive any announcements by the Leader, Members of the Cabinet or the Head of Paid Service.

The Chief Executive, Mrs Briggs, announced that there had been a Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Peer Review which had taken place last week and this week Ofsted and CQC were undertaking an inspection of the same area.  Members had requested a briefing on Mental Health services, which was ready, but would now be delayed in order to allow the teams to focus on the current inspection.

The Chief Executive also reminded members that they were currently in purdah due to the forthcoming By-election on 20 July 2017.

In accordance with the Regulations, Members are invited to declare any disclosable interests under the Code of Conduct and the nature of those interests in respect of items on this Agenda and/or indicate if Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applies to them.

Members were invited to declare any disclosable interests under the Code of Conduct and the nature of those interests and/or indicate if Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applied to them.

Mr Conde declared a personal interest in item as granddaughter just started on SEN pathway.

Mrs Stephenson declared an interest in Item 13 of the agenda as her family ran businesses in Uppingham, but she had no financial involvement.

Mr Clifton declared an interest in Item 13 of the agenda as he was a Director of a charity that ran charity shops but they did not have shops within the County.

Mr Baines declared an interest in Item 13 as had businesses interests in Uppingham and they were included on his register of interests, but would take part in the debate as long as it did not relate specifically to High Street West, Uppingham.

To confirm the Minutes of the 261^st meeting of the Rutland County Council District Council held on 10 April 2017 and the 21^st Annual and 262^nd meeting of the Rutland County Council District Council held on 8 May 2017.

The minutes of the 261^st meeting of the Rutland County Council District Council held on 10 April 2017 and the 21^st Annual, 262^nd meeting of the Rutland County Council District Council held on 8 May 2017 were confirmed by the Council and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any petitions, deputations or questions received from members of the public in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 28. The total time allowed for this is 30 minutes.  Petitions, deputations and questions will be dealt with in the order in which they are received and any which are not considered within the time limit shall receive a written response after the meeting.

There were no petitions, deputations or questions from members of the public.

To receive any questions submitted from Members of the Council in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rules 30 and 30A.

i)        Miss G Waller

It has recently been announced by Centrebus that their service 19 (Nottingham to Peterborough via Oakham and Stamford) will be changed from 13 August this year.  The RF1 Service will be extended to Melton and the Stamford to Peterborough part of the journey retained but the Oakham to Stamford part of the journey will be available Monday to Friday only. (http://www.centrebus.info/Pages/EastLeicestershireRutlandServiceChanges.aspx)

The amendment of this service will be a particular blow to residents of villages on the North Shore of Rutland Water, Empingham and Great Casterton being the bus service which enables residents to access employment (in Oakham or Stamford); medical practices and dentists, shops and post 16 education (whether at New College Stamford, Harington School or in Melton Mowbray; depending on which direction one is travelling).  It should also be noted that our draft Local Plan still names Empingham as a Service Centre; it will seem odd to have a Service Centre with a limited bus provision.

I have been advised by officers that the route is not due to change till 20 September and that the route is remaining but with fewer buses per day; neither of these statements is in accord with Centrebus’ web site.

Can the portfolio holder confirm:

1.    That the bus route currently numbered 19 covering Oakham to Stamford will be retained for the foreseeable future?

2.    That any changes to the timetable will be such that employees will be able to reach their places of employment in Stamford or Oakham before their work is due to begin and that there is a bus to take them home at the end of the day?

3.    That students studying at Harington School and New College, Stamford, will be able to get to the School/College in time in the morning and that there will be a bus they can catch after the last lesson of the day?

4.    That students studying in Melton will be able to get a connecting service in Oakham that will get them to College in time and there will be a return service available to them?

5.    That RCC, in any consultation/negotiation with Centrebus or in any future tendering operation, takes account not only the current subsidy to Centrebus but also the additional costs which would be required to provide alternative transport to post 16 students living in Rutland should this bus be cancelled.

The Leader and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Growth, Infrastructure and Resources (Highways, Transport and Market Towns), Mr Mathias responded as follows:

The proposed revised Oakham – Stamford and Oakham – Melton services are commercial services operated by Centrebus which means that RCC do not have any influence or control over the provision, and are unable to commission a service that would be in direct competition with the commercial provider. The council is currently exploring the impact of the change.  In addition please note that Call Connect is available for the villages along the route into Stamford Monday to Friday from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 130.

To determine matters where a decision taken by a Committee has been referred to the Council in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 110.

No decisions had been referred.

To determine matters where a decision taken by the Cabinet has been referred to Council by the call-in procedure of Scrutiny Panels, as a result of the decision being deemed to be outside the Council’s policy framework by the Monitoring Officer or not wholly in accordance with the budget by the Section 151 Officer, in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rules 206 and 207.

No call-ins were received.

To receive Report No. 136/2017 from the Cabinet on recommendations referred to the Council for determination and to note the Key Decisions taken at its meetings held on 18 April 2017, 16 May 2017 and 20 June 2017.

Report No. 136/2017 from the Cabinet was received, the purpose of which was to consider the recommendations of Cabinet referred to Council for determination and report the Key Decisions made by Cabinet since the publication of the agenda for the previous ordinary meeting of the Council on 10 April 2017.

1)    Council NOTED the Key Decisions made since the publication of the agenda for the previous ordinary meeting of the Council on 10 April 2017, as detailed in Appendix A to Report No. 136/2017.

2)  20 June 2017

Decision No. 61

Report No. 111/2017

REVENUE AND CAPITAL OUTTURN 2016/17 AND BUDGET UPDATE 2017/18

Mr Mathias introduced and moved the recommendations in the report.  Mr Walters seconded the recommendations.

During his introduction Mr Mathias confirmed that the redesignation of the Winter Maintenance Reserve was to ensure funds could be used for all extreme weather circumstances and not just winter weather conditions.

During debate of the recommendations, points raised included:

i.   Mr Mathias confirmed the level of the ceiling for the Winter Maintenance Reserve had been lower at around £75,000, but that £100,000 was the ceiling for the Extreme Weather Reserve;

ii.   The Reserve would be used for circumstances where extreme weather conditions had caused obstruction or damage to roads, including, for example, very hot weather which could cause the road surface to melt; and

iii.   Where privately owned trees had caused an obstruction and been removed, attempts were made to recover the cost from the private individual.

RESOLVED

a)        To APPROVE the changes to the 17/18 budget arising from the receipt of new Government funding as listed in Appendix H to Report No. 111/2017;

b)        To APPROVE to redesignate the Welland Audit Reserve as an Audit Reserve following cessation of the Welland Internal Audit service; and

c)         To APPROVE to redesignate the Winter Maintenance Reserve as an Extreme Weather Reserve with a ceiling of £100k.

To receive the reports from the Scrutiny Commission / Scrutiny Panels on any matters and to receive questions and answers on any of those reports.

No reports were received.

To receive reports about and receive questions and answers on the business of any joint arrangements or external organisations.

      i.        Mr Baines – Environment Agency Flood Defence and Welland Catchment Area Committee

There would be a partnership approach to catchment management, the Environment Agency dealt with Water Framework Directive, flood defence and habitat and the cyber approach was altering. The Welland Partnership had been at forefront of work based on catchment and this authority had acquired an influential role to play as Mr Baines was the only elected member on that group. There was a complete hiatus over any policy at present, due to Brexit, so any future scheme was likely to be more in spirit of localism and get local communities more involved.

Mr Baines confirmed that advice would be obtained from Rural Associations and that the National Farmers Union and the Country Landowners Association who were represented on these bodies.

    ii.        Mr Baines – Rural Community Council

Rutland Community Spirit had heritage lottery funding that ran out in April 2018.  The report to the Heritage Lottery Fund indicates that it was on target in achieving schemes which enabled vulnerable people to gain a sense of belonging and reduce isolation through local links established within their own communities, measured through the establishment of “Good Neighbour Schemes” and the number of volunteers.  It was also noted that the number of communities concentrating on Neighbourhood Plans could be a threat to the number of volunteers coming forward for these community schemes as they had the effect of diverting people’s attention.  The report also contained reference to the risk that the work of the newly formed Rutland Access Partnership may impact on the activities of the Community Council and joint working would be fundamental in ensuring that the work and relationships made through the Rutland Community Spirit were maintained.

Mr Clifton confirmed that the wellness service had been commissioned through the Rutland Access Partnership and also suggested that this may be an area that the Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel may wish to look at.

There was also now someone who had the responsibility for publicising the work through a variety of mediums.

   iii.        Mr Conde – Hanson Ketton Liaison Committee

Meeting on 5 July 2017 it had been highlighted that the Committee had been established for 23 years which reflected the importance of maintaining good relationships with large organisations within Wards.  There had been a development in site allocations and subject to planning approval there was a proposal to put 35 properties on the The Crescent in Ketton.  The Environment Agency were also very happy with compliance from Hanson and reported as being one of the most complaint in the Country.  The Stopping Up Order on Empingham Road was now to go through Judicial Review at the end of July rather than the appeal process.

   iv.        Miss G Waller – LLR Joint Health Scrutiny Committee

Meeting on 27 June 2017, the subject of which would be dealt with at the motion under Item 13 of the agenda.

    v.        Miss G Waller – SACRE

Meeting held at RCC Office on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 135.

To consider the Notices of Motion submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 34, in the order they were received as detailed below. 

The text of the Motions can be found in the agenda pack.

i)     Deterioration in Economic Viability of Market Town High Streets - Councillor Tony Mathias/Councillor Alan Walters.

ii)    NHS Proposal to close the congenital heart unit at UHL Trust (Leicester) – Councillor Gale Waller/Councillor Marc Oxley

i)    The Notice of Motion submitted by Mr T Mathias in accordance with Procedure Rule 34 was received.

Mr Mathias introduced the motion and moved the recommendation below.  Mr Walters seconded the recommendation.

This Council is requested to support the submission of a letter to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government expressing our concern about the deterioration in the economic viability of our Market Town, High Streets. This could include the following issues:

• The lack of influence we as a Council are able to bring to bear
• The impact of the current discretionary rate relief arrangements
• The increasing number of Charity Shops

During his introduction, Mr Mathias highlighted that during the consultation period he had stood with the bus in Oakham Market Place and the reoccurring theme raised by residents and users of the town was that there was too many charity shops in Oakham.  There was a misconception that RCC were able to control the number of charity shops setting up business in the town.  The motion could be worded so as to request that charity shops be required to apply for change of use when taking over premises and for RCC to formulate a policy which would restrict the number of charity shops in the Town Centre.

During debate points raised included:

·         Mr Conde pointed out that charity shops were a good way of recycling used goods and this should be supported.  Also it would be useful to be able to also restrict the number of Betting Shops and Estate Agents;

·         Mr Callaghan was concerned that changes in policy could result in Landlords having empty shops which did not seem fair.  Some people liked charity shops and used them regularly and care should be exercised when restrictions might affect the free market environment;

·         Miss Waller commented that many people relied on charity shops as they were not able to afford buying from new and charity shops also raised money for their respective causes.  It was clear, however, that a large amount of charity shops did not make for a very attractive Town Centre;

·         Mr Oxley supported the idea, but felt it was better to have shops occupied rather than empty;

·         Mr Clifton highlighted that charity shops did a lot of good, they employed at least two people to run the shop and also provided volunteering opportunities for the local community which enabled people to contribute to the community, in turn having a positive impact on Health and Wellbeing.  A broader motion focusing on place shaping may be an improvement;

·         Mr Cross was in support of ideas that would help improve Town Centres and supported increasing powers regarding discretionary rate relief arrangements;

·         Mr Mathias gave the following figures for businesses in Oakham – Out of 220 businesses; 119 paid no rates, 76 paid full rates and the rest paid partial rates;

·         Mr Baines made a distinction between Oakham and Uppingham town Centres.  The problems experienced in Oakham were not the same for Uppingham which did not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 136.

To receive Report No.135/2017 from the Director for Resources.

Report No. 135/2017 was received from the Director for Resources the purpose of which was to obtain Council approval for the submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) on council size as part of the Electoral Review.

RESOLVED

To APPROVE the submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) on council size recommending that the number of Councillors remains unchanged.

To receive items of urgent business which have been previously notified to the person presiding.

No matters of urgent business were received.