STATEMENT OF DECISIONS
MADE AT A MEETING OF THE BOARD
HELD ON 30TH
NOVEMBER 2006
PRESENT:
Councillor Brian
Silvester
(Leader of the Council in the Chair)
Councillor Rachel
Bailey
(Portfolio Holder for Planning)
Councillor David
Brickhill
(Portfolio Holder for Economic Development)
Councillor Graham
Fenton
(Portfolio Holder for Finance)
Councillor John
Hammond
(Portfolio Holder for the Local Environment)
Councillor Bill
McGinnis
(Portfolio Holder for Leisure)
Councillor Margaret
Simon
(Portfolio Holder for Customers)
Councillor Ray
Westwood
(Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods)
NON-BOARD MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE:
Councillors W T Beard, P K Butterill, R Cartlidge, B Evans, M
Grant, S W Hogben, M R Jones, A Moran and M
Roberts
OFFICERS IN ATTENDANCE:
Paul
Ancell
(Chief Executive)
Lisa
Carr
(Principal Policy Officer)
Jenny
Cross
(Executive Director, Treasury and Corporate Support)
Bill
Howie
(Democratic Services Manager)
Carol
Jones
(Democratic Services Officer)
Chris Henshall
(Deputy Monitoring Officer)
Bernadette Hurst (Assistant Chief
Executive)
David
Marren
(Executive Director, Direct Services)
Keith Pickton (Head
of Leisure Operations)
Su
Turner
(Local Strategic Partnership Manager)
Rachel Welch
(Human Resources Manager)
NOTE: The following Decisions should be read in
conjunction with the corresponding reports which accompanied the
Board Agenda issued on 21st November 2006. The agenda
and reports are available on the Council's Internet
Website. www.crewe-nantwich.gov.uk
95.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillors D Brickhill, M J Simon and A Moran declared
personal interests in agenda items 5 (Local Area Agreements) and 9
(White Paper Strong and Prosperous Communities) on the basis of
their County Council membership.
No other Member made any declaration of interest in any item
of business on the agenda.
96.
BOARD DECISIONS 19TH OCTOBER 2006
The Board received the Statement of Decisions made at a
meeting held on 19th October 2006.
97.
RECONSIDERATION OF DECISIONS
No decisions had been referred back to the Board for
reconsideration.
98.
CONSIDERATION OF ANY PERFORMANCE AND OVERVIEW
COMMITTEE REPORTS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Performance and Overview Committees had been invited to
comment on Board reports. A comment received from the Performance
and Overview Committee, Organisation was considered under the
appropriate heading.
99.
OPEN SPACE REVIEW REFERRAL FROM PERFORMANCE
AND OVERVIEW COMMITTEE (LOCAL ECONOMY &
ENVIRONMENT)
At its meeting held on 17th October 2006, the
Performance and Overview Committee, Local Economy and Environment,
received a presentation from Councillor Roy Cartlidge based on the
summary report of the launch of a document entitled "Open Space
Vision of the Future" on 21st August 2006 at the
Municipal Buildings.
The Board received for information the summary report of the
Performance and Overview Committee (Local Economy and
Environment).
100.
TOURISM DEVELOPMENT OFFICER POST- REFERRAL FROM PERFORMANCE AND
OVERVIEW COMMITTEE (LOCAL ECONOMY &
ENVIRONMENT)
At its meeting held on 28th November 2006,
the Performance and Overview Committee (Local Economy
and Environment) had expressed concern about the delay in
appointing a Tourism Development Officer. The Committee requested
that the Vacancy Panel reconsider the matter with a view to
appointing an Officer on a full-time permanent basis.
It was reported that the post was to be filled on a 3-day per
week basis for a period of 12-months. External
funding in respect of this post was being sought.
101.
LOCAL AREA AGREEMENTS
The Board considered the joint report of Councillor Brian
Silvester, Leader of the Council and Councillor Ray Westwood,
Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods.
The Cheshire Local Area Agreement (LAA) was a
three-year service delivery arrangement between the Government,
local authorities and partners (working through the Local Strategic
Partnership) to improve public services. The
process had involved extensive consultation and discussion amongst
partners.
The draft agreement had been submitted to Government Office
North-West (GONW) on 29th September 2006 and the initial
feedback identified that additional work was required before the
final submission on 20th December 2006.
DECISION:
(A)
That the latest version of the draft Cheshire Local
Authority Agreement be noted; and
(B)
That authority be granted to the Assistant Chief Executive,
in consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Portfolio
Holder for Neighbourhoods, to endorse the final Draft Local Area
Agreement prior to its submission to GONW on 20th
December 2006.
Alternative options:
(a)
Amend the Local Area Agreement; or
(b) Decline
to endorse the Local Area Agreement and refuse to
grant delegated authority.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
Preparation of a Local Area Agreement is a statutory duty
which will assist in making public services responsive to community
needs and develop sustainable communities.
(b)
Non-endorsement of the Local Area Agreement could be
detrimental to partnership development in Cheshire.
102.
CREWE TOWN CENTRE MASTERPLAN
The Board considered the report of Councillor Rachel Bailey,
Portfolio Holder for Planning.
There had been significant progress in taking forward
proposals for the improvement and regeneration of Crewe Town
Centre; in particular, the Modus scheme and town squares
enhancement. This had been achieved despite the
absence of an overall Masterplan.
A Masterplan was required to bring all the development
proposals together and guide
decision-making.
The Board was asked to agree to the commissioning of a Crewe
Town Centre Masterplan, to be funded from this year's Local
Authority Business Growth Incentive.
DECISION:
That the Board agree to the commissioning of a Crewe
Town Centre Masterplan to be funded to a maximum level of £40,000
from this year's Local Authority Business Growth
Incentive.
Alternative options:
Continue to address development and enhancement issues in the
town centre, without a clear indication of the overall
vision.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a) The Masterplan
will inform decision-making.
(b) It will seek to
promote sustainable development in Crewe town centre.
(c) It will
provide a "joined-up" approach to the development of the town
centre and will improve the prospects of designing out
crime.
(d) It is
intended to provide a safe, attractive and prosperous town
centre.
103.
2006-2011 REVENUE STRATEGY
The Board considered the report of Councillor Graham Fenton,
Portfolio Holder for Finance.
The report presented amendments to the Medium-Term
Financial Strategy for 2006-2011 and set out the
financial impact of delivery of the Council's existing key
policy commitments in terms of revenue spending and
the Council's capacity to fund these.
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL:
(A)
That the up-dated Revenue Strategy 2006-2011 be
approved;
(B)
That the 2007/2008 budget preparations be guided by the
September retail price increase and the medium-term financial
position by an allowance for inflation. (The projections will
continue to illustrate the impacts of various Council Tax levels);
and
(C)
That proposals for savings and any requests for growth be
brought forward to enable examination of alternative budget
proposals, with the principle of sustainability taken into
account.
Alternative options:
As detailed in the report.
Reasons for the Decision:
The Revenue Strategy sets out the agreed framework of
principles for the management and planning of the Council's
finances and is an important element of the development of the
iterative process of financial planning.
104.
CAPITAL INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2006-2011
The Board considered the report of Councillor Graham Fenton,
Portfolio Holder for Finance.
The report provided details of the up-dated Capital Strategy
for 2006-2011 which built on previous work. It
also included a review of the resources allocated to existing
projects which were underway and to the new proposals which had
been scored and ranked in the usual way.
The Board was asked to recommend to Council approval of the
2006-2011 Capital Strategy and the amendment of
the Capital Programme to include the changes recommended in the
Strategy.
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL:
(A)
That the Capital Strategy 2006-2011 be approved; and
(B)
That the Capital Programme be amended to include the
changes recommended in the
Strategy.
Alternative
options:
(a)
To adopt an alternative system of prioritisation;
or
(b)
Not to allocate as many resources at this time.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The Capital Strategy is a prime document in the context of the
Council's financial forward planning in that it estimates resources
available in the medium-term and prioritises their use to obtain
maximum benefits.
(b) The draft Capital Strategy has been
informed by the Community Strategy and Corporate Strategy and is,
consequently, the product of extensive
consultation. Members have been involved in
devising the project scoring and weighting framework. The
Management Team and other Officers have been involved in developing
the recommended schemes and the Strategy now reflects the
priorities for capital investment subject to full project analysis
as schemes become part of the Capital Programme.
(c) The Capital Strategy describes how the
deployment of capital resources contributes to the achievement of
the Council's policies, priorities and
objectives. It is informed by the Community
Strategy and so reflects the visions and aspirations of local
people, recognising the potential for others to contribute to ideas
and resources and participate in service delivery.
(d) The Strategy addresses environmental
sustainability. Improvements to the built and
natural environment in general are key objectives of the Capital
Strategy and the projects have been scored to reflect this.
(e)
The Strategy features a number of schemes which impact positively,
either directly or indirectly, on crime and disorder.
105.
WHITE PAPER "STRONG AND PROSPEROUS COMMUNITIES"
INVITATIONS TO COUNCILS IN ENGLAND TO MAKE
PROPOSALS FOR FUTURE UNITARY STRUCTURES AND
TO PIONEER, AS PATHFINDERS, NEW TWO-TIER
MODELS
The Board considered the report of Councillor Brian Silvester,
Leader of the Council.
As part of the recently published White Paper the Government
had issued an invitation to authorities in the County areas to
formulate proposals for Unitary Local Government.
It was also proposed that in areas where it was not considered
desirable to make such a proposal then bids from County/District
partnerships for pathfinder status were sought. The Board was
invited to make a recommendation to Council on the options detailed
in the report.
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL:
(A)
That Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council considers that
improved two-tier working in partnership with Cheshire County
Council and the other districts in Cheshire presents the best
option for the governance of the people of Cheshire generally, and
Crewe and Nantwich in particular; and
(B)
Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council is not in favour of
being involved in a bid for improved two-tier pathfinder
status.
Alternative options:
(a) In
conjunction with other Cheshire districts, a bid for unitary
status, involving the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich, be submitted
to the Government for consideration, the precise form of unitary
authority to be determined by the Council; or
(b)
In
partnership with Cheshire County Council and the other Cheshire
districts, a bid for Improved Two-Tier Pathfinder status be
submitted to the Government for consideration.
Reason for the Decision:
To comply with the timetable, the Council is required to
submit its proposals to Government by 25th January
2007.
106.
CORPORATE SELF-ASSESSMENT
The Board considered the report of Councillor Brian Silvester,
Leader of the Council.
It was a requirement of the Comprehensive Performance
Assessment carried out in 2003 that the Council should produce a
corporate self-assessment. Although there was no statutory
requirement to do so, the assessment had been refreshed each year
as a matter of good practice.
DECISION:
That the 2006 Corporate Self-Assessment be
approved.
Alternative options:
None considered.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The self-assessment is designed to increase the Council's awareness
of its achievements and outlines priorities for future
action.
(b)
Whilst there is no statutory requirement, it is regarded as good
practice to undertake an annual self-assessment.
107.
BEST VALUE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PROGRESS
REPORT 1ST APRIL 2006 30TH SEPTEMBER
2006
The Board received, for information, the report of Councillor
John Hatfield, Portfolio Holder for Human Resources.
The report provided service performance information on the
agreed basket of performance indicators for the financial year to
30th September 2006, together with the annual Borough
Profile measures.
108.
2006/2007 FINANCIAL MONITORING REPORT 1ST APRIL
2006TO 30TH SEPTEMBER
2006
The Board received, for information, the report of Councillor
Graham Fenton, Portfolio Holder for Finance.
The report provided financial monitoring information on actual
expenditure and income in the current financial year 2006/2007 to
30th September 2006, compared with profiled budgets and
gave an up-dated projected out-turn for the 2006/2007 year.
109.
FEES AND CHARGES 2007/2008
The Board considered the report of Councillor Graham Fenton,
Portfolio Holder for Finance.
The report set out the proposed fees and charges for services
for the period 2007-2008, which would allow for greater opportunity
for consideration of potential variation in charging policy prior
to the normal timetable for final budget-setting.
The Performance and Overview Committee (Organisation) had
queried the Board's power to make a decision in respect of fees and
charges and considered that it was for Full Council to make such a
decision.
RECOMMENDATION TO BUDGET COUNCIL:
That the fees and charges, as set out in the schedule
in the report, be approved, subject to the following
amendments
-
Green garden waste scheme (brown bin) per
annum
increase
from £20 to £22 + £1 per annum until break-even
achieved;
- Primary and
High School swimming charges to remain at £1.00
Alternative option:
Vary the charges within each service area.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
An Advisory Group of Members, representing all political
groups, met to consider the draft scale of fees and charges and
provide advice to the Portfolio Holder.
(b)
Maintaining and improving income from fees and charges is
important in helping to ensure financial sustainability in the
medium-term.
(c)
Many of the services identified in the report are
discretionary but will provide diversionary activities designed to
reduce the incidence of anti-social behaviour.
110. TAX BASE FOR
COUNCIL TAX AND DISCOUNT FOR SECOND HOMES
The Board considered the report of Councillor Graham Fenton,
Portfolio Holder for Finance.
The report provided details of the recommendations to Council
in respect of the Council Tax Base calculation for the forthcoming
year. It also detailed the tax base for each
parish and Nantwich Town Council and a proposal to determine the
level of Council Tax for second homes.
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL:
(A)
That the discount for second homes be approved at
25%;
(B)
That the Tax Base for the whole Borough, as detailed
in Appendix A1 of the report, be approved;
and
(C)
That the Tax Base for the parishes and Nantwich Town
Council, as detailed in Appendix A2 of the report, be
approved.
Alternative Options:
(a) To
maintain the discount reduction at 50% for second homes and approve
the collection rate of 99%.
(b) To vary
the level of discount and/or collection rate.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The Local Government Finance Act 1992 and subsequent Regulations
require the Borough Council to determine its Council Tax Base. This
information is required by Cheshire County Council, Cheshire Police
Authority and Cheshire Fire Authority for their budgetary purposes
and enables the Borough Council to set the level of Council Tax for
the financial year 2007/2008.
(b)
The period for setting the Council Tax Base and informing major
precepting authorities runs from 1st December to
31st January. This information will
be needed to be recommended to Council at its meeting on
13th December 2006 to meet this deadline.
(c)
The change in discount in respect of second homes will result in an
estimated additional £30,000 for Crewe and Nantwich.
111.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO OFF-STREET PARKING ORDER -
RAILWAY STREET CAR PARK, CREWE
The Board considered the report of Councillor John Hammond,
Portfolio Holder for the Local Environment.
Railway Street Car Park was located at the rear of Nantwich
Road, Crewe, (adjacent to Virgin Rail's Car
Park). A charge of £3 per day, for all-day
parking was currently levied. It was relatively
under-used at present and would be suited to increased use by rail
travellers or anyone wishing to leave their vehicle
overnight. The report proposed changes to meters
and signage to enable users to purchase tickets for more than
one-day to cover overnight absence.
DECISION:
That approval be granted to amend the Borough of
Crewe and Nantwich (General) (Off-Street Parking Places) Order
1995, in respect of Railway Street Car Park, Crewe, as detailed in
the report, to permit users to pay for more than one day's stay at
a time.
Alternative option:
To decline to approve the Amendment.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The proposal will provide a small amount of growth
(approximately £3,200 per annum).
(b)
The change to the "pay and display" charging regime will
assist all rail users primarily, and may help to encourage reduced
car use.
(c)
It will improve car park usage.
112.
CLEAN NEIGHBOURHOODS AND ENVIRONMENT ACT 2005
CONSULTATION IN RELATION TO THE MAKING OF A
DOG CONTROL ORDER
The Board considered the report of Councillor John Hammond,
Portfolio Holder for the Local Environment.
The Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 (CNEA)
received Royal Assent on 7th April
2006. It would replace the provisions of the
Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996 with broader powers to make Dog
Control Orders. The Act also gave Local
Authorities new powers to improve and protect environmental
quality. Final Government Guidance had been published in March 2006
and many of the measures were effective from April this year.
DECISION:
That statutory consultation be approved in relation to
the making of a Dog Control Order to cover all open land within the
Borough to which the public had access, and to cover all offences
in respect of dogs introduced by the Clean Neighbourhoods and
Environment Act 2005 using the enforcement measures and locations
detailed in Appendix 1 of the report submitted, as a basis for
public consultation, subject to the following amendment
-
Appendix 1 -
Delete "All carriageways with a
speed limit of 40 mph or less and all adjoining footpaths and
verges"
Insert "All
carriageways and all adjoining footpaths and
verges"
Alternative option:
Take no action, leaving the existing 1996 Act Order in
place.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The Regulations require statutory consultation to be
undertaken.
(b)
This is an opportunity to reinforce behavioural changes required to
tackle responsible dog-ownership, and environmental
nuisances. Improved behaviour will lead to
reduced Council resources allocated to enforcement and
cleansing.
(c)
Failure to implement
appropriate measures would seriously limit the opportunity to
improve public satisfaction with these services.
113.
CREWE AND NANTWICH STRATEGY FOR PLAY
The Board considered the report of Councillor Ray Westwood,
Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods.
The "Big Lottery" had allocated a sum of £246,000 for the
Borough for use for children's play. In order to
receive the funding allocation, the Borough was expected to lead on
the development of a multi-agency working group, developing a
strategy for play with an action plan for
delivery.
In 1998, the Borough produced its first Play Strategy which
helped to raise the profile of play and focused on its importance
in supporting children's emotional, social and physical
development. The original Play Strategy was
out-of-date and there was a requirement for a new strategy to be
developed and implemented.
The draft Strategy for Play had been developed following
consultation with partner organisations and the local community and
the Board was asked to accept and endorse it.
DECISION:
That the Crewe and Nantwich Strategy for Play be
accepted and endorsed, as the vision for play for the next 3-years
within the Borough.
Alternative options:
(a)
Amend the Strategy and make other recommendations: or
(b)
Decline to accept the Strategy.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The importance of children's play is identified as one of the
outcomes in "Every Child Matters" (ECM) and the development of the
Strategy is a response to the ECM framework.
(b)
The Council will be able to access funding from the "Big Lottery"
for use for children's play, funding which would not be available
in the absence of the Strategy.
(c)
Some of the proposals in the Strategy will support and deliver
programmes to tackle youth nuisance, parental training and
bullying.
114.
YOUNG PERSONS HOUSING STRATEGY
The Board considered the report of Councillor Rachel Bailey,
Portfolio Holder for Planning.
The report presented the draft Strategy for the provision of
Young Persons Housing. The Strategy detailed the current
accommodation and housing services available to young people
between the ages of 16 and 24 years in the Borough and made
recommendations to help improve the provision of both.
DECISION:
That the Young Persons Housing Strategy be adopted and
implemented.
Alternative options:
None considered.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The Strategy endorses the Council's commitment to sustainable
communities by recognising the need to support young people in
securing housing and maintaining their homes.
(b)
The Strategy will assist in the reduction of homelessness and will
aid the principles of reducing crime and disorder by reducing the
number of "rough sleepers" in the Borough.
(c)
Whilst it is not a statutory requirement to prepare a Young Persons
Housing Strategy, it is considered good practice for a local
authority to produce such a document.
(d)
Failure to
proceed with the Young Persons Housing Strategy could have adverse
implications for future housing developments and support
options.
115.
MUNICIPAL SQUARE, CREWE SUSPENSION OF CERTAIN WORKS
The Board considered the report of Councillor Brian Silvester,
Leader of the Council.
Following public consultation, a significant majority of the
Citizens' Panel voted in favour of siting the
War Memorial in Crewe on the Municipal Square. The Board resolved
to complete the works and had agreed that a further report on
costs, including any abortive costs, be submitted to a future Board
meeting.
The report now submitted provided details of the implications
of the delay and the Board was asked to approve the exercise of
virement to enable the abortive costs associated with the delay to
be funded from the extra investment income.
DECISION:
That the abortive costs associated with the delay in
respect of re-location of the War Memorial in Crewe, be funded from
virement from the extra investment income.
Alternative options:
None considered.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
There had been widespread public concern about the proposed
re-siting of the War Memorial and the previous consultation
exercise had been considered to be inadequate.
(b)
The second consultation exercise had resulted in overwhelming
support for the War Memorial to be sited on the Municipal
Square.
116.
NANTWICH OUTDOOR POOL SNOWHILL FEASIBILITY
STUDY
The Board considered the joint report of Councillor Bill
McGinnis, Portfolio Holder for Leisure, and Councillor Rachel
Bailey, Portfolio Holder for Planning.
At its meeting on 27th July 2006, the Board had
agreed to the commissioning of a commercial assessment, up to
£10,000, of the Snowhill and Riverside area in Nantwich, in advance
of a wider feasibility study. (Decision No. 56).
Funding for the wider study was now available and it had
become apparent that the commercial assessment would be difficult
to complete in isolation. The Board was asked to
rescind Decision No. 56 (to commission a separate commercial
assessment of the Snowhill and Riverside area in Nantwich) and to
include commercial considerations as part of the wider study.
DECISION:
(A)
That Part (B) of the Board's Decision No. 56 made on
27th July 2006 be rescinded (ie "That a commercial
assessment of the area's potential be commissioned, not exceeding
£10,000, in advance of the wider feasibility study");
and
(B)
That the proposed wider planning feasibility study for the
whole of the Snowhill and Nantwich Riverside area, include
a commercial assessment of the area's
potential.
Alternative option:
To continue to undertake a separate commercial
assessment.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The decision will result in a saving of up to £10,000 which would
have been required for the separate commercial assessment.
(b)
The scheme will result in an improvement of Nantwich Pool
(including a new roof for the outdoor pool) as part of a wider,
attractive and vibrant re-development of Snowhill and enhancement
of the Riverside area.
117.
OPEN SPACE REVIEW
The Board considered the report of Councillor Bill McGinnis,
Portfolio Holder for Leisure.
At its meeting on 6th September 2006 the Board
agreed:
'That a sum of up to £100,000 be allocated
from the Capital Contingency Fund to undertake site surveys
and develop improvements programmes with contractual arrangements
deferred until legal opinion had been obtained on the implications
arising from the Commons Act 2006.' (Decision
No 63).
The report contained details of the legal advice in respect of
the implications of the Commons Act 2006 which received Royal
Assent on 19th July 2006. The Board
was recommended to continue with its Open Space Review, but take
account of the possible implications of the Commons Act.
DECISION:
That the review of Open Spaces
continue.
Alternative option:
None considered.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)The disposals of surplus areas of
open space will fund improvements to other areas thereby improving
their sustainability in the future.
(b) The disposal of land will involve
local level consultation. It will, therefore, be necessary to
develop improvement plans for the areas which can offer options for
local residents to consider.
118. AIR QUALITY
MANAGEMENT AREA HOSPITAL STREET, NANTWICH
The Board considered the report of Councillor John Dwyer,
Portfolio Holder for Safer Communities.
Previous reports to Board on 28th March 2006 and
7th September 2006 respectively, had set out the
background to a proposal to declare an Air Quality Management Area
in part of Hospital Street, Nantwich.
The consultation period in respect of the planned definition
had now expired and no objections had been received. The Board was
invited to confirm the Order.
DECISION:
That the Order declaring an Air Quality Management
Area in Hospital Street, Nantwich, be approved.
Alternative options:
(a)
Amend the Order; or
(b)
Decline to approve the Order
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The purpose of air quality management is to reduce health
risks to exposed individuals. Long-term exposure
to levels of nitrogen dioxide, in excess of government objectives,
increases the risk of affects on lung function.
(b)
The Order will enable the preparation of an Action Plan aimed
at reducing levels of nitrogen dioxide to no more than government
objectives.
(c)
Failure to approve the Order could result in the Secretary of
State using reserve powers to take action.
119.
GAMBLING ACT 2005
The Board considered the report of Councillor John Dwyer,
Portfolio Holder for Safer Communities.
In order to carry out its new function as the licensing
authority for gambling, the Council must have in place a licensing
policy, known as its Statement of Principles.
The Board was asked to recommend to Council approval of the
Statement of Principles and to delegate authority in respect of
duties, authorities and functions associated with this new
responsibility, to the Licensing and Regulatory Committee.
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL:
(A)
That the Statement of Principles be approved and
adopted;
(B)
That all duties, authorities and functions in the
determination of fees to be charged for premises licences be
delegated to the Licensing and Regulatory Committee;
and
(C)
That all duties, authorities and functions in the exercise
of the registration of small society lotteries be delegated to the
Licensing and Regulatory Committee.
Alternative options:
None considered.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
Although the Act does not come fully into force until
1st September 2007, the adoption of the Statement of
Principles is timely in that the Council must have in place an
approved licensing policy (Statement of Principles) after carrying
out the necessary consultation exercise.
(b)
The new licensing system is underpinned by three statutory
licensing objectives, one of which is the prevention of gambling
from being a source of crime or disorder, or being used to support
crime.
120.
RACE EQUALITY SCHEME 2006-2008
The Board considered the report of Councillor John Hatfield,
Portfolio Holder for Human Resources.
It was a statutory requirement to review the Council's list of
functions, policies and proposed policies which were relevant to
race equality and the general statutory duties every three years.
The Commission for Racial Equality recommended a new, up-dated
Scheme, which would reflect the past achievements and changes, to
be published every third year May 2005, May 2008,
etc.
The report submitted contained details of the Race Equality
Scheme for 2006-2008. The Board was asked to approve the scheme and
nominate a Councillor Champion whose portfolio included equality
and diversity.
DECISION:
(A)
That the Race Equality Scheme 2006-2008 be approved;
and
(B)
That Councillor John Hatfield be appointed the Councillor
Champion.
Alternative Option:
To decline to up-date the Race Equality Scheme.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
Up-dating of the scheme ensures the inclusion of race
equality in the Council's policies and practices, improving
services the Council provides and promotes the Council's on-going
commitment to equality and diversity.
(b)
Failure to up-date the Race Equality Scheme is contrary to
the stated requirements of the Commission for Race Equality and
could result in a compliance action being taken against the
Authority.
121.
ADOPTION OF NEW BYE-LAWS FOR THE PRACTICE OF ACUPUNCTURE,
TATTOOING, SEMI-PERMANENT SKIN COLOURING,
COSMETIC PIERCING AND ELECTROLYSIS
The Board considered the report of Councillor John Dwyer,
Portfolio Holder for Safer Communities.
The legislation relating to the practice of acupuncture,
tattooing, ear piercing and electrolysis had been up-dated to
include new powers for the regulation of cosmetic piercing and
skin-colouring practices. The Board was asked to recommend to
Council that the existing bye-laws be revoked and in their place,
the Government's new consolidated Model Bye-laws be adopted.
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL:
That, pursuant to Section 15 of the Local Government
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, as amended by Section 120 of
the Local Government Act 2003, Council makes new Bye-laws for the
Regulation of the Practice of Acupuncture, Tattooing,
Semi-Permanent Skin-Colour, Cosmetic Piercing and Electrolysis in
the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich.
Alternative Options:
To decline to make new bye-laws as detailed.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The bye-laws made in 1985 under the Local Government
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 are now out-of-date as a result
of changes in industry practice and intervening relevant
legislation.
(b)
The measures will increase health protection and reduce the
risk of transmission of blood-borne virus infection.
(c)
The making of new bye-laws will allow the Council to carry
out its obligations to monitor establishments carrying out the
relevant practices, more fully and effectively, and enable it to
enforce any breaches.
122.
REVIEW OF REDUNDANCY POLICY
The Board considered the report of Councillor John Hatfield,
Portfolio Holder for Human Resources.
The existing Redundancy and Redeployment Policy had been in
place for approximately ten years and there had been significant
changes in Employment Law since the Policy was
introduced. A review of existing policy had been
carried out and a number of recommendations for a variety of
changes, both in style and provision within the policy were
proposed.
The report outlined the main changes proposed to up-date the
policy. The Board was asked to approve the
amendments to the revised policy and recommend to Council that it
be adopted.
DECISION:
That the proposed amendments to the Redundancy and
Redeployment Policy, as identified in the report, be
approved.
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL:
That the revised Redundancy and Redeployment
Policy be adopted.
Alternative option:
To amend the policy for submission to the unions for further
consultation.
Reason for the Decision:
(a)The document is the result of
consultation with the unions, and amendments have been made to
reflect their comments.
(b) The revised policy is in line with
the changing legal and operational climate.
123.
REPORT OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DIRECT SERVICES
In accordance with Contract Regulations, the Executive
Director, Direct Services, reported that tenders had recently been
invited and received for the following
Tender for the supply of 5 refuse collection vehicles
(only 4 vehicles to be ordered at the present time)
Nineteen tenders had been invited; nine were
returned. The nominated contractor was
Dennis Eagle Ltd., Heathcote Way, Heathcote Industrial
Estate, Warwick, CV34 6TE
124.
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
RESOLVED : That the press and public be excluded from
the meeting during consideration of the following item pursuant to
Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds
that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as
defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A (as amended) of
the Act.
125.
WRITE-OFFS (PARAGRAPH 3)
The Board considered the report of Councillor Graham Fenton,
Portfolio Holder for Finance.
Financial Regulations required Borough Council approval to be
obtained before any individual debt which exceeded £1,000 was
written off. The report made recommendations for
write-offs in connection with Sundry
Debtors.
DECISION:
That Sundry Debtor arrears totalling £38,271.16, as
detailed in Appendix 1 of the report, be written
off.
Alternative Options:
As detailed in the report.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
All reasonable steps have been taken to pursue the
debts.
(b)
The write-off action is in accordance with the Council's
Financial Regulations.
126.
RE-ADMITTANCE OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
RESOLVED: That the press and public
be re-admitted to the meeting.
127.
NANTWICH SWIMMING POOL MAINTENANCE
The Chairman agreed to take this item as a matter of
urgency.
The Board considered the report of Councillor Bill
McGinnis, Portfolio Holder for
Leisure.
The report explained the problems which had been experienced
with plant and machinery at Nantwich Swimming Pool during recent
months and in particular, the mechanisms necessary to maintain the
water in a clean condition to ensure that there were no health
risks to users of the pool.
It had been the Council's practice to contact local
specialised contractors for this type of work.
Two such contractors (GRC Filtration Services and F T Leisure) were
invited to provide estimates of the cost of the work necessary to
rectify the problems. Both companies had
previously carried out work at Nantwich Swimming
Pool. Upon receipt of estimates, it was decided
that the extent of the repairs required a more in-depth condition
survey. Only GRC Filtration Services was able to
undertake the survey within the timeframe.
The Board was asked to authorise the necessary repairs and to
waive Standing Orders to enable GRC Filtration Services, which had
submitted the lowest cost estimate, to carry out the work.
DECISION:
(A)
That the necessary repairs and refurbishment be
undertaken to the plant at Nantwich Swimming Pool at an estimated
cost of £49,500 to be met from within the Capital Programme's
Contingency Budget; and
(B)
That Standing Orders be waived to allow GRC
Filtration Services to undertake the work during a closure period
for public use of 18th December 2006 to 5th
January 2007.
Alternative Options:
(a)
Continue to operate the pool under manual dosing
arrangements; or
(b)
Undertake repairs to the pipework and filters only, at a
reduced cost of £39,000.
Reasons for the Decision:
(a)
The repairs will ensure that the pool plant system is
reliable and will maintain pool water quality.
(b)
Failure to carry out the necessary repairs could lead to
further disruptions to public service, a likelihood that further
expenditure of £28,500+ would be required within a 3-5 year period
and the loss of income to the Council.
................................................................Signed