Agenda and decisions

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Doug Bainbridge.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the Special meeting of the Council held on 28 January 2021.

It was RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Special Council meeting held on 28 January 2021 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Mayor.

To receive any communications that the Mayor may wish to put before Council.

The Mayor began by looking forward, later in 2021, to the 75^th anniversary of the designation of Stevenage as the UK’s first post-war new town.  Let’s hope we can enjoy that.

The Mayor welcomed Councillor Adrian Brown to the meeting following his recent illness due to Covid-19.  He had the sad duty to report the loss of an SBC staff member to Covid-19.  The Council had seconded staff to the Robertson House vaccination centre, as well as appointing staff to work as Covid marshals, and SBC was continuing to maintain important services to its residents.

The Mayor announced that he had recently had his first Covid-19 vaccination. He thanked all the NHS workers and volunteers that were involved, and urged everyone when they were invited to make an appointment and received the vaccination.

The Mayor commented that many events had not been possible and others had been done in a different way, but it had been a busy couple of months and he had been involved with events including:

After ten months in office, the Mayor commented that he was still finding trying to fulfil the position during the pandemic very difficult.  So many important events for the community had been cancelled or done in ways which were just not the same as people coming together.

The Mayor advised that people could still help him to raise money for his nominated charities.  Go to - https://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/JimBrown20.   People were also encouraged to identify if there were any fundraising ideas or events where the Mayor could help boost their profile.

The Mayor concluded by stating that the High Street, the town centre and the neighbourhoods would be opening up again soon, and that there would be plenty to look forward to, but urged everyone to continue to look after each other.

To approve the Council’s Final General Fund and Capital Budgets for 2021/22, projected 2020/21 General Fund and Capital Budgets, and final proposals for the 2021/22 Council Tax and Council Tax Support Scheme.

Reports and appendices attached.

The Main Debate related to item 4 on the agenda.

The Chief Executive advised that there was a small typographic error in recommendation 11 of the Motion, which was the same as Recommendation 2.5 of Item 4, and which should read ‘That the 2021/22 Fees and Charges increase of £131,700, as approved at the January Executive, be noted.’

The Mayor reminded Members that, at the Annual Council meeting held on 20 May 2020, it was agreed to amend the Council’s Standing Orders to require that prior notice be given of any amendments to the Budget recommendations.  He understood that no such amendments had been submitted.

The Leader presented the proposed 2021/2022 Budget, projected 2021/22 General Fund Budget and final proposals for the 2021/22 Council Tax and Council Tax Support Scheme.  The Leader moved the Motion, recommendations of the Executive and the formal Council Tax Resolution that had been circulated to Members.  This was seconded by the Deputy Leader.

During the debate, and whilst acknowledging that the deadline for submission of budget amendments had passed, Councillor Robin Parker asked if further consideration could be given to the following matters going forward:

·            Bulky Waste Collection – the introduction of a reduced charge for the collection of less than 6 items per household;

·            Local Community Budgets – a reduction in the Youth Mayor’s Budget so that it was at the same level as Members (£1,500);

·            Local Community Budgets – the ability for Members to carry forward and amount of unspent budget from one financial year to the next, except in the final year of their term of office.

The Mayor requested officers to respond to Councillor Parker concerning these matters outside of the meeting.

After a full debate, a recorded vote* was taken and it was RESOLVED:

1.             That the following be approved:

a.             the revised working revenue estimates for the year 2020/21 amounting to £12,196,410 and the revenue estimates for 2021/22 amounting to £10,635,570;

b.             the contribution from balances totalling £2,409,851 in 2020/21;

c.             the contribution from balances totalling £326,067 in 2021/22.

2.             That it be noted that at its meeting on 20 January 2021 the Executive calculated the amount of 27,733.8 Band D equivalent properties as its council tax base for the year 2021/22 in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 1992 made under Section 31B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as amended by Section 74 of the Localism Act 2011.

3.             That the following amounts be calculated by the Council for the year 2021/22 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as  amended by Section 74 of the Localism Act 2011:

None.

None.

None.

The Mayor advised that a number of questions had been submitted by the Youth Council, but unfortunately had arrived after the required deadline and were too late for inclusion the agenda.  However, officers had been asked to provide replies directly to the Youth Council on the matters raised. 

In accordance with Standing Orders, written answers to these questions will be tabled at the Council meeting.

(A)       Question from David Healey

What is the Council doing to make electric car charging spaces and facilities accessible in town and residential areas, noting the government requirement for all electric and hybrid cars by 2030?  Will a task team be appointed to see the rollout for facilities in the residential areas, on request, for those without off street parking?  There are extensive Government grants available for up to 75% and even more funding has just been added.  A joint team from the environmental and transport portfolios should work on a master plan.

Council received one question from a member of the public relating electric vehicle charging points.  The response to the question had been published in the supplementary agenda for the meeting.  The questioner (Mr David Healey) was present in the meeting, and asked the following supplementary question:

“As the Council has committed to being more green, and has allocated funding for electric vehicle chargers, and the fact that some Government funding is available:

1.      As part of this and other schemes, has the Council considered the potential in residential areas to install smaller, cheaper and more accessible lamp post chargers, as seen in other Council areas?

2.      And when considering the location of these chargers in neighbourhood areas, has the Council considered those locations not only based on the electric grid, but also based on where there is current demand from residents (such as creating a list of requests/register of interests)?”

The Portfolio Holder for Economy, Enterprise and Transport replied by referring back to the Government’s “Road to Zero” Strategy, published three years ago, which stated how it was proposed to support the transition to zero emission road transport.  Policy 27 of that Strategy alluded to the Automated and Electric Vehicles Bill 2018, which provided powers to provide a uniform method for accessing public refuelling points.

The Portfolio Holder advised that, as a consequence of the above Bill, Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) published an Electric Vehicle Technical report in September 2018.  Section 6.9 of that report touched on the issue of the retrofitting of electric vehicle charging points in existing homes and homes with on-street parking.  The Government recognised the challenges faced by local authorities in implementing such equipment, not least due to the infrastructure constraints.  The HCC report went on to recommend a note of caution, particularly when investing in charging points, given the speed in technical innovation and the likelihood of some chargers becoming redundant.

The Portfolio Holder referred to the adopted SBC Parking Provision and Sustainable Transport Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).  Sections 5.1 to 5.4 of that SPD referenced electric vehicle charging points, particularly with regard to new development.  The SBC Future Town, Future Transport Strategy (in Sections 5.52 to 5.55) recognised the increase in electric vehicle usage, and an action embedded in the Strategy endorsed the implementation of more charging points, as part of a combined initiative with HCC.

The Portfolio Holder drew attention to the SBC Climate Change Strategy (September 2020), which informed that the National Committee on Climate Change, which advised the Government, had stated that there should be one electric vehicle charging point for every 1,000 cars by 2030.  For Stevenage, this would mean 42 chargers on SBC-controlled land, against the current total of 10 such chargers.  He agreed, therefore, that there was clearly a need for a much faster transition to electric vehicles, which would mean the installation of many more charging points to those currently provided.

The Portfolio Holder concluded by referring to the questioner’s suggestion in his original question regarding  ...  view the full decision text for item 7.

In accordance with the Council’s Standing Orders, the Leader of the Opposition shall be given the opportunity to raise one matter relevant to the Borough that has arisen since the last meeting of the Council. The Leader of the Council shall then have the opportunity to advise the Council of matters relevant to the Borough that have arisen since the last meeting.

The Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Phil Bibby, asked the following question:

“In relation to the Stevenage Connection Area Action Plan, no-one would disagree with the necessity to revamp the Station gateway to the town centre, but this is only now going out to consultation, with plans for the SG1 development well progressed.  Do you see a danger that no funding is secured for developing this area in the short-term, which is vital for the success of regeneration as a whole?”

The Leader of the Council replied that the Council had always planned to develop an Area Action Plan for the Station.  She referred to the Town Investment Plan bid submitted to the Government by the Stevenage Development Board, the outcome of which was expected imminently.  If the funding bid was successful, there was likely to be an indication from the Government about which projects contained in the bid were expected to be progressed.  She stated that she would not be surprised if one of those projects would be the scheme for improvements to the Station area.  She added that Mace, the developers of the SG1 scheme, had been involved throughout in discussions regarding the Station Area Action Plan, in order to ensure connectivity between these two projects.  She commented that the scheme for improvements to the Station area had also received significant support from major businesses in the Borough, many of whom had representation on the Stevenage Development Board.

The Leader of the Council provided updates on the Covid-19 vaccination programme; the Prime Minister’s relaxation of Covid restrictions Road Map; and local Covid-19 infection rates.  She then invited Councillor Adrian Brown to address the Council.  Councillor Brown gave a moving account of his recent experience in the Lister Hospital Critical Ward following his contracting of coronavirus.  He thanked everyone for their messages of support and best wishes during his time in hospital and afterwards.

The Leader of the Council provided further updates on plans for a 6 month pilot scheme to reduce the cost of collection of bulky waste for up to 3 items; and works to build up the highway in certain parts of the High Street to increase pavement seating/dining areas.

The Council then received updates from relevant Executive Portfolio Holders on the following matters:

·        Green Homes Grants;

·        Stevenage Gateway Area Action Plan;

·        Local Community Budgets;

·        Covid support for Community & Neighbourhood Teams;

·        Neighbourhood Meetings; and

·        Community Safety in Bedwell.

The Leader of the Opposition informed the Council that Hertfordshire County Council would be producing a position statement regarding electric vehicle charging points (proposing a mixture of off-street charging points, car park charging points, destination charging points and rapid charging stations).  He added that HCC felt that on-street charging points had a role to play, but were struggling to find out how this would be managed on a day-to-day basis.  He asked how parking would be managed in a street with electric charging points (in terms of a potential scramble between electric and fossil-fuel vehicles for parking  ...  view the full decision text for item 8.

To consider an Officer report that recommends the approval of the Treasury Management Strategy 2021/22 including the Annual Investment Strategy and the prudential indicators.

Report and Appendices attached

The Council considered a report in respect of the Annual Treasury Management Strategy including Prudential Code Indicators 2021/22.

It was moved, seconded and RESOLVED:

1.          That the Treasury Management Strategy 2021/22, as attached at Appendix A to the report, be approved.

2.          That the prudential indicators for 2021/22 be approved.

3.          That the Minimum Revenue Provision Policy be approved.

4.          That an increase to counterparty limits for short term investments (invested for up to one year) from £8Million to £10Million, when cash balances are higher than £30Million, be approved.

To receive updates from the Chairs of the Scrutiny Committees on the recent activities of those Committees.

The Chair of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee reported that there had been two meetings of the Committee since the December 2020 Council meeting.  The Committee had reviewed the decisions of the Executive on financial/budgetary matters, as well as a number of policy and strategy items.

The Chair of the Community Select Committee reported that Members of the Committee had been involved in an interesting Portfolio Holder Advisory Group meeting on the Community Safety Strategy.  She had also held an informal meeting of the Committee to consider suggested items for scrutiny/review in 2021/22.

The Chair of the Environment & Economy Select Committee reported that formal meetings of the Committee had been temporarily suspended, but that the work of the Committee on scrutinising the response of the Council to the Covid-19 pandemic was continuing in a variety of informal ways, including a Sub-Group which was looking at the impact of the pandemic on young people.

(i)         SBC communications with new residents

To consider the following motion submitted by Councillor Stephen Booth.

“That the Council ensures that new residents, whether new to Stevenage or moving from other parts of the town, in addition to their Council Tax demand, receive a leaflet welcoming them to the area, explaining who their ward representatives are and how to contact them, their access to local facilities, what town wide facilities are available to them and useful information of these services and other essential services via web addresses and phone numbers."

SBC communications with new residents

A motion was moved by Councillor Stephen Booth, and seconded by Councillor Andy McGuinness.

Following debate, and upon being put to the vote, the motion was carried and it was RESOLVED:

“That the Council ensures that new residents, whether new to Stevenage or moving from other parts of the town, in addition to their Council Tax demand, receive a leaflet welcoming them to the area, explaining who their ward representatives are and how to contact them, their access to local facilities, what town wide facilities are available to them and useful information of these services and other essential services via web addresses and phone numbers.”

The Chief Executive stated that, with the Motion having been carried, he would ask the relevant officers to consider how to facilitate this and provide details of all the relevant financial and other implications as required.  This would include giving consideration to the establishment of an online new residents section via the SBC website that could be updated quickly and easily as and when key information changed and/or future additions or enhancements were suggested.  Once an appropriate way forward has been identified he would inform all Members.

In accordance with Standing Orders, written answers to the following questions will be tabled at the Council meeting:

(A)          Question from Councillor Stephen Booth

“Why has it taken so long for the Council to apply planning enforcement proceedings to a house under construction at 8 Magellan Close, despite repeated and detailed e-mails to the Planning Department from local residents and councillors? recording blatant breaches of planning permission?

(B)          Question from Councillor Andy McGuinness

‘What updates have the Council been given about progress on the commencement of works to the Gresley Park Development?’

(C)          Question from Councillor Robin Parker CC

‘The 7 replacement Stevenage ‘town entry’ signs recently appeared at the main entrances to the town, and my investigations reveal that the cost to Stevenage Council Tax payers is £5,240, which includes paying an artist to design them, and that the decision to spend funds on this project was that of the Leader alone.

a.  Why was such an important and publicly visible symbol of Stevenage not allowed to be discussed with other councillors or the tax paying public?

b.  How many complaints about the old signs were received, and from whom?

c.     What was wrong with the old signs?

d.  Why has the information contained on the old style of signs been omitted?

e.  Why was this project imperative at a time when, largely as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, SBC’s finances are in a precarious position and savage service cuts are being made by the Labour Executive Members?’

(D)          Question from Councillor Graham Snell

‘At the last Planning and Development Committee meeting, on the 3^rd of February, an item was discussed about various options regarding dramatic changes to Lytton Way and the area around it in the Town Centre. This included a list of options for long term redevelopments including a new Railway Station, Leisure Centre, Theatre and various other new buildings.

A very detailed report was discussed in brief and noted at the P&D meeting which was produced in part by David Lock Associates, described as ‘Stevenage Connection, Area Action Plan’.

a.   How long has this project been in the planning stage?

b.   How much did the David Lock Report actually cost including an estimate of the cost of officer involvement?

c.   Has the Public Consultation timetable taken into account the long-term implications of the Covid-19 pandemic and the widely projected changes to work practices, particularly on much of the Retail Industry?’

(E)          Question from Councillor Tom Wren

‘According to the Hertfordshire Waste Partnership 2019/2020 Annual Report, the percentage of household waste recycled in Stevenage has now declined to less than 40%.  Stevenage has also had the lowest recycling rate of all the ten local authorities in Hertfordshire for the past 5 years and with very little improvement in this time.  What action does the Council plan to take to improve this rate?

The Annual Report can be found here?:

https://www.hertfordshire.gov.uk/media-library/documents/environment-and-planning/waste-and-recycling/residual-waste-treatment-contracts/hwp-annual-report-2019.20.pdf

The Council received five questions from Members to Committee Chairs/Portfolio Holders.  The responses to the five questions had been published in the supplementary agenda for the meeting.

The Mayor asked Member questioners if they would be prepared to submit their supplementary questions and receive replies outside of the meeting.

(A)       Councillor Stephen Booth agreed to submit a supplementary question and receive a reply outside of the meeting.

(B)       Councillor Andy McGuinness agreed to submit a supplementary question and receive a reply outside of the meeting.

(C)      Councillor Parker commented that he would also submit a supplementary question in writing, and then asked the following supplementary question:

“On 11 February 2021, Officers had advised him that the new “town entry” signs were paid for from the Street Nameplate budget, which otherwise would have been underspent in 2020/21, at a cost of £5,240.  Eleven days later he received a further communication from officers stating that the Engineering Service has limited funds for Street Nameplates and that they would only be replaced if illegible or broken.  Which, if either, of these statements was correct and, if there was an underspend, why not return it to the General Fund?  Why was there no public consultation regarding the new signage, and why do they not contain any Town twinning information?”

The Portfolio Holder for Economy, Enterprise and Transport replied by referring to the opening statement in SBC’s Arts & Heritage Strategy, in that the Council “aims to build our unique heritage to make Stevenage a destination town that attracts visitors from Hertfordshire, London and beyond to our thriving, creative environment”.  This Strategy received cross-Party support when it was introduced.

The Portfolio Holder for Economy, Enterprise and Transport considered that the new “Town Entry” signs satisfied the above thinking creditably and amiably.  The new signs were indicative of a thriving, vibrant town.  He commented that similar new signs had recently been introduced in Welwyn Garden City, and had received very positive feedback from the local community.  He was pleased with the new signs for Stevenage and he hoped that Members of the Council would be too.

(D)      Councillor Graham Snell agreed to submit a supplementary question and receive a reply outside of the meeting.

(E)       Councillor Tom Wren agreed to submit a supplementary question and receive a reply outside of the meeting.

To agree a proposed Members’ Allowances Scheme for 2021/22.

Report and appendix attached.

The Council considered a report in respect of a proposed Members’ Allowances Scheme for 2021/22.

It was moved and seconded that the recommendation set out in the report be approved.

As an amendment, it was moved by Councillor Robin Parker and seconded by Councillor Stephen Booth, that the level of the Special Responsibility Allowance for the Chair of the Licensing Committee, together with the level of Allowance paid to the Leaders of the Opposition and Minority Parties, be referred back to the Independent Remuneration Panel for further consideration.

Following debate, and upon being put to the vote, the amendment was lost.

Upon the substantive motion being put to the vote, it was RESOLVED that a Members’ Allowances Scheme for 2021/22, as set out in Appendix A to the report, be agreed.

To consider an officer report recommending the Pay Policy Statement for the financial year 2021/22.

Report and Appendix attached

The Council considered a report in respect of the Pay Policy Statement for 2021/22.

It was moved, seconded and RESOLVED:

1.          That the Pay Policy Statement set out in accordance with the Localism Act 2011 and the Local Government Transparency Code 2015, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report, be approved.

2.          That the Pay Policy be placed on the Council’s website, and that a notice of the policy be published in the next edition of the Council’s Chronicle magazine.

To consider the following motions –

1.       That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in Paragraphs 1 – 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as amended by Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006.

2.       That Members consider the reasons for the following reports being in Part II and determine whether or not maintaining the exemption from disclosure of the information contained therein outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

It was RESOLVED:

1.     That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in Paragraphs 1 – 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as amended by Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006.

2.     That the reasons for the following reports being in Part II were accepted, and that the exemption from disclosure of the information contained therein outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

To approve recommendations relating to a revised Business Plan for the Wholly Owned Housing Development Company.

[Recommendations 2.2.1 to 2.2.4 in the report are referred to Council for approval.]

The Council considered a Part II report in respect of a renewed business plan and financial projections regarding the wholly owned Housing Development Company.

It was moved, seconded and RESOLVED that Recommendations 2.2.1 to 2.2.4 of the report be approved.