To confirm the record of the meeting of the Places Scrutiny Panel on 8 October 2015 (previously circulated)

The Record of the Meeting of the Places Scrutiny Panel held on 8 October 2015, copies of which had been previously circulated, were confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

In accordance with the Regulations, Members are invited to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have 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.

Mr E Baines declared an interest in item 12 point 6.2 of the agenda, as he owns property in Uppingham Town Centre.

To receive any petitions, deputations and questions received from Members of the Public in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 217.

The total time allowed for this item shall be 30 minutes.  Petitions, declarations and questions shall be dealt with in the order in which they are received.  Question may also be submitted at short notice by giving a written copy to the Committee Administrator 15 minutes before the start of the meeting.

The total time allowed for questions at short notice is 15 minutes out of the total time of 30 minutes.  Any petitions, deputations and questions that have been submitted with prior formal notice will take precedence over questions submitted at short notice.  Any questions that are not considered within the time limit shall receive a written response after the meeting and be the subject of a report to the next meeting.

No petitions, deputations or questions had been received.

To consider any questions with notice from Members received in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule No. 219 and No. 219A.

No questions with notice had been received from Members.

To consider any Notices of Motion from Members submitted in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule No. 220.

No notices of motion had been received from Members.

To consider any matter referred to the Panel for a decision in relation to call in of a decision which relates to this Scrutiny Panel’s remit and items on this Agenda.

No matter had been referred to the Panel for a decision in relation to call-in of a

decision in accordance with Procedure Rule 206.

To receive a presentation from the Deputy Chief Fire and Rescue Officer, Steve Lunn.

The panel received a presentation from the Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Service regarding the overall proposals currently being put forward as part of a consultation and the Medium Term Financial Strategy – Issues and Options. 

The Chairman invited questions and comments, the following points were raised:

      i.        There had been approval of a reduction in Fire Fighters (Operational Employees) and the budget had been removed as part of the proposed savings.  The employees, however, were still in post and being paid and this was a major factor in the budget gaps recording the presentations;

     ii.        Savings had so far been made by removal of vehicles.  Reducing the number of employees was being looked as it was clear that those employees that would leave through retirement would not be sufficient.  A six option plan had been put forward to look at a solution;

    iii.        The Government spending review on 25^th November 2015 would put further pressure on achieving reductions;

--o0o—

Mr O Hemsley joined the meeting

--o0o—

   iv.        When setting the reserve consideration was given to the level of risk balanced against the needs of the operational budget;

    v.        This consultation did not include provision in Rutland, that had been decided last year and the results of the trial of the First Responders and the Rapid Response Vehicle in Rutland would be assessed separately;

   vi.        The risks had been analysed to ensure that by using resources at neighbouring stations and working together there would be no effect on operational capacity;

  vii.        The population of Rutland, Leicestershire and Leicester had increased over the last few years, but the number of emergency incidents had reduced;

 viii.        The number of large scale incidents had also been reducing by on average one per year;

   ix.        A Community Risk Model had been devised in order to understand the geographical location of higher risk areas so that resources can be directed to the correct areas;

    x.        Tactical Response Vehicles cost £200,000 less than a full fire engine and have reduced running costs.  They were effective in dealing with small scale incidents and were only used to support full fire engines in large scale incidents.  When a 999 call was made the systems were able to calculate which vehicle would be required at a given incident;

   xi.        Staff have been consulted and accept the necessity of the proposals put forward;

  xii.        The reductions are centred on On-call and retained fire crew;

 xiii.        Cuts in neighbouring areas had been taken into account to ensure that all areas were adequately covered.  Any further cuts in local areas would be assessed and any issues would be addressed;

 xiv.        Mothballing properties could increase costs due to damage and security implications – this is why the recommendation was to sell properties detailed in the summary of proposals;

  xv.        The proposals will be considered at a meeting with the Fire Authority on 10 December 2015; and

 xvi.        There was an over provision in the Oakham area, but this would be considered when the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 423.

To receive Report No. 217/2015 from the Chief Executive.

(Previously circulated under separate cover)

Report No. 217/2015 from the Chief Executive was received.

The purpose of the report was to report on the Council’s Performance for the second quarter of 2015/16.

The Chairman invited questions and comments.  The report was taken without debate.

AGREED:

1.    That the Panel NOTED the contents of Report No. 217/2015.

To receive Report No. 206/2015 from the Director for Resources.

(Previously circulated under separate cover)

Report No. 206/2015 from the Director for Resources was received.

The purpose of the report was to inform Cabinet and all Members of the full year forecast position as at Quarter 2 for 2015/16 and to alert them to issues that may impact on the Medium Term Financial Plan to enable them to maintain sound financial management of the Council’s operations.

The following points were raised during discussion:

      i.        Savings had now been made in the Special Educational Needs School Transport budget and so there was unlikely to be a pressure going forward.

AGREED:

1.    That the Panel NOTED the content of Report No. 206/2015.

--o0o—

Mr R Begy left the meeting and did not return.

--o0o--

To receive Report No. 210/2015 from the Director for Places (Development and Economy).

Report No. 210/2015 from the Director for Places (Development & Economy) was received.

The purpose of the report was to ask the Panel to consider the draft Housing Allocation Policy (HAP) as part of the consultation process with local community stakeholders.

The following points were raised during discussion:

1. There was some concern that local people should be prioritised.  Reassurance was given that the revised criteria retained priority for local people, along with the local connection requirements and additional points were also available for those living in villages and being rehoused in the same village;
2. The new build programmes currently underway would ensure that there would be sufficient housing stock to make the changes viable;
3. The Government was moving the emphasis on affordable housing towards encouraging people to buy houses to live in rather than to rent out.  This could lead to a reduction in availability of social housing in the long term;
4. Government guidance provides that reasonable preference must be given to people in armed forces in urgent need of housing;
5. There are special circumstances that can be considered such as mental health issues;
6. There had been cases where people from outside the County had been transferred in and this negatively affected the local community.  There were cases where a mutual exchange could be done with another Local Authority; there could also be exceptional circumstances; and
7. Having more people on the list helped the system to flow and prevented homelessness.

AGREED

1.    The Panel NOTED the contents of Report 210/2015 and were supportive of the revised Housing Allocation Policy.

To receive Report No. 211/2015 from the Director for Places (Development and Economy).

Report No. 211/2015 from the Director for Places (Development & Economy) was received.

The Portfolio Holder, Mr King, introduced the report the purpose of which was to consider a review and update of existing Supplementary Planning Documents

(SPDs) relating to planning obligations in the light of consultation responses, to be

applied alongside the Council’s Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging

Schedule.

The following points were raised during discussion:

1. The introduction of CIL would make it easier for developers to work out their obligations and would also make collection and enforcement easier for the council;
2. CIL would be used towards building community infrastructure in order to ensure the impact of housing growth is supported by services and facilities;

--o0o--

Mr R Gale left the meeting

--o0o--

3. CIL does not deal with affordable housing, this would be dealt with under the revised Supplementary Planning Document;
4. In exceptional cases it may be necessary for developers to pay both CIL and S.106 contributions, but there was a limit to the amount that the developer would have to pay and these situations would be very rare;

--o0o--

Mr R Gale re-joined the meeting

--o0o—

5. The money would be collected by the Council.  25% of contributions would go to the Parish where a Neighbourhood Plan had been adopted, 15% where there was no adopted Neighbourhood Plan.  The remaining amounts would be allocated in accordance with the specific needs and pressures that arise from each particular site;
6. A report was being prepared in order to deal with the Governance issues regarding allocation of the funds; and
7. Single dwellings which are self-build and meet the exemption criteria are not subject to CIL and therefore this may impact on the way that areas deal with single dwellings in their Neighbourhood Plans in order that the area benefits from investment in its infrastructure.

AGREED

1.    That the Panel NOTED the contents of Report 211/2015; and

2.    That the Chairman would forward the comments of the Panel to Cabinet.

To receive Report No. 230/2015 from the Director for Places (Environment, Planning and Transport).

Report No. 230/2015 from the Director for Places (Environment, Planning & Transport) was received.

The Portfolio Holder, Mr Mathias, introduced the report the purpose of which was to consider street lighting arrangements for Rutland.

The following points were raised during discussion:

1. The policy was intended to make the system more fair for everyone and would also lead to considerable reduction in energy and maintenance costs;
2. Under Option 4, lighting had been categorised as either highway or community lighting.  Energy costs for community lighting would be recovered from town and parish councils/meetings;
3. A policy document should be provided for where street and highway lighting will be provided in the future and a programme of lighting stock should be maintained and kept up to date;
4. New lights can be factory pre-set in order to dim at specific times.  The level of dimming would only need to be minimal in order to achieve significant energy savings;
5. There would be consultation with parish and town councils; and
6. The change in policy may result in the need to invest capital (which may be borrowed) in order to implement the changes.  It was anticipated that the payback would take 7 to 8 years.

AGREED:

1.    That the Panel NOTED the contents of Report 230/2015; and

2.    That the Panel SUPPORTED Option 4, as set out in section 4 of the report and that the next steps would be for Officers to draw up a policy to go out for consultation.

--o0o—

Mr N Tomlinson left the meeting and did not return.

--o0o--

To consider Scrutiny issues to review.

Copies of the Forward Plan will be available at the meeting.

The next meeting would be the Special Budget meeting on the 13 February 2016.

The following topics were due to be considered at the 4 February 2016 Panel Meeting:

·         Highway Capital Programme

·         Local Transport Plan 4

·         Waste Management Strategy

·         Flood Risk Management Strategy

·         Quarter 3 Financial Management report

·         Quarter 3 Performance Management Report

The Chairman reminded Members that comments could be put forward to Cabinet where reports were not coming to the Scrutiny Panel Meeting.

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

There was no urgent business.

13 January 2016 – Budget

4 February 2016

13 January 2016 – Budget

4 February 2016